Categories » ‘DYSFUNCTIONAL EDUCATION’
April 17th, 2012 by olddog
April 16, 2012
Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro aka Barry Dunham aka Barack Dunham – all known aliases of the occupant in the White House. I will refer to him as Barry Soetoro since that appears to be the last known legal name of the mystery man.
Over the past four years I have followed every case filed, read every brief submitted and a million words on the constitutional meaning of 'natural born citizen'. Only those in denial or whose ideological agenda depends on Barry staying in office refuse to acknowledge that Soetoro was born with dual citizenship. He was ineligible in 2008 and he's still ineligible in 2012.
In the only oral arguments to actually take place out in Georgia, the end result has been the same. Two weeks ago, the Georgia Supreme Court checked their manhood at the door and ruled against all the plaintiffs. Those judges followed the cowardly path taken by Judge Mahili in his original decision to allow Barry on the Georgia ballot despite the undeniable legal facts presented by plaintiffs during the original hearings. However, what the Georgia Supreme Court did was even more reprehensible according to Van Irion, Liberty Legal Foundation, who represented David Welden:
"Both LLF and Georgia Representative Mark Hatfield pointed out to the Court the date on which the Secretary of State planned to certify the election. Yet the Court sat on our filings for seven days, then ruled on the day certification had been planned. If we had been given one or two days we could have filed an emergency motion with the U.S. Supreme Court. Currently the Justice assigned to review such motions from Georgia is the most Constitutional originalist, Justice Clarence Thomas. I'm sure that the Georgia Supreme Court is aware that Justice Thomas would have been our next step, had we had time to file another motion. The Georgia Court ensured that such review was not possible by waiting until the last day to rule before our motion became moot. It is possible that this timing was nothing more than a busy court not being able to rule faster, but after what we have seen in Georgia, do you believe that? Even if that is true, what does it say about this Court's level of respect for the importance of this case? The Court didn't even bother to spell our client's name correctly! I believe that this latest ruling proves that Georgia law does not apply to the powerful."
As I have written in many columns, Barry cannot be impeached. He usurped the office of the presidency. The only legal method to remove him is through the Quo Warranto statute. A proper QW was filed on January 3, 2012, by presidential candidate, Montgomery Blair Sibley. He filed a Certified Petition for Writs Quo Warranto and Mandamus in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the proper legal forum. The judge, Amy Jackson Berman, apparently doesn't have the courage to address this issue because she has refused to respond.
Forty days after Sibley's filing, the District Court Judge had not ruled on any part of the suit, so he filed a petition for mandamus with the Circuit Court of Appeal. The Appeals Court then ruled: “The district court's delay in ruling on the petition for writ of quo warranto is not so egregious or unreasonable as to warrant the extraordinary remedy of mandamus.” Sibley then filed with the U.S. Supreme Court: "On April 20, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether to fast-track the determination of Obama's constitutional eligibility to be President."
Unfortunately, a new effort is underway and being heavily promoted by popular talk show hosts like Alex Jones. 'Impeach 2012' is a project by Sean Stone, son of movie producer, Oliver Stone. Another wasted effort by someone who, while his intentions may be from the heart, apparently has zero understanding of the constitutional problem of impeaching someone who never held the office. THAT is the meat of the legal issue. Alex Jones has had Dr. Edwin Vieria on his show several times and I believe he respects Edwin's undisputed status as an expert on constitutional issues. Edwin addressed this issue back in 2008:
"Seventh, if Obama does become an usurper posturing as “the President,” Congress cannot even impeach him because, not being the actual President, he cannot be “removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (see Article II, Section 4). In that case, some other public officials would have to arrest himwith physical force, if he would not go along quietlyin order to prevent him from continuing his imposture. Obviously, this could possibly lead to armed conflicts within the General Government itself, or among the States and the people.
"Eighth, even did something approaching civil war not eventuate from Obama’s hypothetical usurpation, if the Establishment allowed Obama to pretend to be “the President,” and the people acquiesced in that charade, just about everything that was done during his faux “tenure in office” by anyone connected with the Executive Branch of the General Government, and quite a bit done by the Legislative Branch and perhaps the Judicial Branch as well, would be arguably illegitimate and subject to being overturned when a constitutional President was finally installed in office. The potential for chaos, both domestically and internationally, arising out of this systemic uncertainty is breathtaking.
"The underlying problem will not be obviated if Obama, his partisans in the Democratic Party, and his cheerleaders and cover-up artists in the big media simply stonewall the issue of his (non) citizenship and contrive for him to win the Presidential election. The cat is already out of the bag and running all over the Internet. If he continues to dodge the issue, Obama will be dogged with this question every day of his purported “Presidency.”
I can't tell you how many emails I've received over the past few years from "patriots" who say they don't care whether or not he can't be impeached from a constitutional prospective, "we" have to impeach him anyway to get him out of office!
That position is no different than those we battle against who care nothing for the U.S. Constitution regarding Barry and his ineligibility. Two wrongs do not make a right. Don't people get it yet? Don't they understand if you play the game by their rules you will lose every time?
There will be no impeachment by the Outlaw Congress. Fact challenged, U.S. Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr., [R-NC] has introduced a resolution to impeach for high crimes and misdemeanors except that as a usurper, Soetoro never had legal authority to act as Commander-in-Chief.
The Republicans know such a resolution will go no where. It was introduced March 7, 2012, and has a grand total of 2 co-sponsors. As Bush was to Pelosi, Barry is to the GOP for the 2012 elections. The deal makers in the Outlaw Congress are fully aware that we the people know they are responsible for allowing the electoral college vote to proceed on January 9, 2009, installing an impostor president in the White House. Jones' resolution is simply throwing scraps to the peasants to appease. Keep them herded in the wrong direction which protects the gross negligence by every incumbent on January 9, 2009.
Those who continue to spend time and money on an impeachment are working for the wrong side whether they know it or not. If Soetoro's "presidency" is allowed to stand as legitimate, again, it will set one of the worst legal precedents in the history of this country. I hope that people like Alex Jones will stop promoting that effort.
While Sheriff Joe's Cold Posse continues their investigation, is there any other legal method to remove Barry from the White House? You can't say remove him from office since he was never eligible to run in 2008. Because Barry was never eligible to be on the ballot in any state, no one had the right to vote for him in 2008.
There's no question Soetoro's Selective Service Registration Card is a forgery. I don't believe there's doubt any longer he has been using someone else's social security number. The birth certificate he has presented to the world is a forgery. But, how do we legally deal with it as we wait to see what the U.S. Supreme Court decides on April 20, 2012, and beyond?
By demanding a special prosecutor be appointed to deal with only one issue: The forged birth certificate. The role of a special counsel is to investigate wrong doing by the Executive Branch. Barry Soetoro released a forged document in his "official" capacity on April 27, 2011. He "owns it" now and for that alone, a special counsel could be appointed.
Why not include the forged Selective Service (SS) card and use of someone else's social security number (SSN) to a special counsel? Because the SS card forgery was committed before he was "elected". I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say whether or not Barry can still be indicted and prosecuted under federal law for forging his SS registration form. The statute of limitations might have already run.
As for using someone else's SSN, Soetoro can weasel out of that one by saying his deceased mother applied for the number while he was a minor and he never had reason to question it. (Smirk)
Second, and I didn't believe it until I read the cases, courts have now given the green light in promoting identify theft. In 2010, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that a man who used his real name but someone else's Social Security number to obtain a car loan was not guilty of "criminal impersonation," overturning convictions by lower courts. That followed a ruling the prior year by the U.S. Supreme Court, quote: "A Mexican man who gave a false SSN to get a job at an Illinois steel plant could not be convicted under federal identity theft laws because he did not knowingly use another person's identifying number. The ruling overturned an opinion by a federal appeals court in St. Louis — and contradicted earlier findings by circuit courts in the Southeast, upper Midwest and the Gulf states."
Oh, that's right. That thief used someone else's SSN to get a job, but didn't commit a crime because he "did not knowingly use another person's identifying number". Well, just whose number did that thief think he was using since it wasn't his own? Those judges should be thrown off the bench for literally opening the door for more identity theft ruining people's lives.
Soetoro can be indicted and prosecuted after he leaves "office" for carrying out a "scheme to defraud" the public via his "dishonest services"; United States v. Frega, 179 F.3d 793 (9th Cir. 1999). He most certainly can be indicted, and hopefully convicted, under the wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. §1343. That is not idle speculation. The impostor president, knowing he was ineligible, solicited campaign funds via television, radio and the Internet to the tune of about $700 million dollars. Those charges alone, if convicted, would put him in federal prison for a long time.
The House Judiciary Committee has the power and authority to demand a special counsel. The conundrum is not an easy one to overcome. Current law allows the U.S. Attorney General to appoint a special counsel. The thoroughly corrupt, Eric Holder, will never appoint one to investigate the putative president's deliberate release of a forged document. A forged document that allegedly reinforces his eligibility. The House Judiciary Committee could take the extraordinary step of going to the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC and demand a special counsel be appointed.
If Rep. Jones feels so strongly about impeachment, perhaps some of his constituents can educate him on why that cannot and will not happen and to support appointment of a special counsel. To not support such an appointment will speak volumes.
If the millions of Americans who are putting their efforts towards impeachment would flood the House Judiciary Committee with letters demanding a special counsel, it would raise the stakes to a new level. It would also make Barry's situation so untenable he "resigns" or his handlers force him to leave; we know how issues "grow legs". The question of why would Barry use a forged birth certificate raises the one legal issue for which he can be removed from the White House: his dual citizenship at birth, not where he was born. A special counsel would be forced to address that issue. It's called motive.
At this time we don't know what Sheriff Joe will do with his final investigation as far as a legal enforcement body. But, every member of the U.S. House of Representatives is up for reelection this November. Remind members of the Judiciary Committee and your incumbent that if they don't stand up for the U.S. Constitution now, look for a new job. Hit your incumbent at every town hall meeting, every fund raiser and any where else he/she appears. Republicans desperately want this to go away, but we the people can show them it isn't and we will not stop until Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama is brought to justice for his crimes.
1- The conundrum of removing Obama/Soetoro from office (5.11.2011)
2- Follow up on Quo Warranto as it relates to removing Obama/Soetoro (5.12.2011)
3- Why Obama cannot be impeached (7.14.2011)
4- Obama could be removed by his own signature (7.22.2011)
April 16th, 2012 by olddog
By James Corbett
“War is a racket. It always has been.” These words are as true now as they were when Major General Smedley Butler first delivered them in a series of speeches in the 1930s. And he should have known. As one of the most decorated and celebrated marines in the history of the Corps, Butler drew on his own experiences around the globe to rail against the business interests that use the U.S. military as muscle men to protect their racket from perceived threats. From National City Bank interests in Haiti to United Fruit plantations in Honduras, from Standard Oil access to China to Brown Brothers operations in Nicaragua, Butler pointed out how intervention after intervention served the business interests of the well-connected even as American taxpayer money went to foot the bill for these adventures. The names and places may have changed, but the old adage holds: the more things change, the more they stay the same.
The National Transitional Council that is nominally in charge of what is left of Libya announced this week that they are beginning a probe of foreign oil contracts brokered during Gaddafi's reign by his son, Saif al-Islam. Libya is sitting on the largest oil reserves in Africa, and it is no coincidence that within weeks of the start of the NATO campaign last year the rebels had already secured the country's oil ports and refineries on the Gulf of Sidra and established their own national oil company for negotiating contracts with the invading forces. Although the oil contract probes are supposedly meant to show the transparency of the new “government” and their willingness to root out the graft and kickbacks inherent in the old regime, it's quietly acknowledged that the process will be used to reward the nations that most visibly supported last year's invasions and punish those who were more reticent.
Surprising, then, that the first companies on the block are Italy's Eni and France's Total. Both countries fostered close ties with the NTC last year and France was the first country to officially recognize them as the government of Libya. But now Libya's general prosecutor is reviewing documents related to these companies for possible financial irregularities. The SEC is getting in on the act, too, requesting documents relating to both companies' Libyan operations to check for suspected violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The potential blow to the European giants' share in the Libyan market is especially painful in light of the upcoming Iranian oil embargo that threatens to squeeze the crude imports of Greece, Italy and Spain. Now, as Libya ramps up oil production to pre-war levels the obvious potential winners in the probe are the American and British majors, who could end up eating up some of Eni and Total's share in Libya's oil production should the investigation lead to charges.
China may also have reason to be wary of their standing with the new government. Chinese-Libyan ties were increasingly close in the years leading up to Gaddafi's ouster, with trade volume having reached $6.6 billion in 2010. In 2007, as the US was beginning to put AFRICOM together and the competitive scramble for African resources was heating up, Gaddafi delivered an address to the students of Oxford University where he praised China's hands-off approach to investment in Africa. At the time, Gaddafi suggested that Beijing was winning the hearts and minds of Africans with its reluctance to interfere in local politics, while Washington was alienating the population with their heavy-handed interventions. In the wake of the NATO bombing the would-be government of Libya is singing a different tune and relations with China have cooled down. Last August a senior NTC official suggested that China would be punished when it came time to award reconstruction contracts in Libya because of their initial reluctance to support the rebels. Although the statement was downplayed, it was revealed earlier this month that Chinese companies are still waiting to begin negotiations on losses to frozen and outstanding contracts worth $18.8 billion. Relations are still cordial, though, and the Libyan government is assuring China that the contracting companies will be in a better position to resume negotiations after national elections in June.
These latest moves from Tripoli may be as much about projecting the idea that the NTC is actually functioning as a government than anything else, though. Armed militias are still waging violent turf wars throughout the country, with 26 people dying in fighting between rivals in the western town of Zwara earlier this month and 150 dying in skirmishes last month in the southern city of Sabha. One militia stormed a hotel in Tripoli and opened fire, then beat and kidnapped the manager after he told a militia member to pay an outstanding room bill. Last week hundreds marched in Benghazi to call for an end to the violence between the armed gangs. The country is deeply divided along tribal lines and armed militias still occupy government buildings and openly flaunt the pronouncements of the erstwhile government. The idea that the NTC is actually functioning as a government is a pipe dream at this point, but as long as they keep the oil pumping and the victors of last year's humanitarian love bombing get their spoils, there's hardly a peep out of Washington, Paris, or London. Smedley Butler would not be surprised.
Meanwhile in Syria, the racketeers' plans for a Libyan repeat are proceeding apace. Last week we reported on the so-called “Friends of Syria” and their agreement to begin openly funding the rebels to the tune of millions of dollars. This week we have been watching the inevitable, pre-scripted “break down” in Annan's UN-brokered ceasefire. Exactly on cue, unverified reports from unnamed activists have begun rolling in to the usual media mouthpieces via foreign-based NGOs proclaiming so many people have died in continued fighting. The unacknowledged elephant in the room, however, is that, exactly as Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has been attempting to point out all month, it's impossible to expect a cessation in fighting when you are openly arming, training and funding an insurgent proxy army that is hell-bent on toppling the government. However, Lavrov is banging his head against a brick wall. The ceasefire was never meant to be a ceasefire and it's all political theater at this point anyway. Any and every unverified rumor of fighting or violence in the country will now be taken as a sign that Assad has broken the agreement and the pressure to get Beijing and Moscow to acquiesce to the toppling of the Syrian government will intensify.
In the end, this will not be a carbon copy of Libya. There will be no NATO-led bombardment or large-scale military intervention, because Russia couldn't allow that to happen. Besides, Syria has Russian supplied surface-to-air missiles and no compunction about using them. Instead, political pressure will increase for Assad to step down and the funds and arms to the rent-a-rebel force will continue increasing until the government is toppled. The dangerous factor in this equation is that neither the west nor China/Russia have blinked yet and there is a significant amount of face to lose for one side or the other in this proxy struggle. The one with the most to lose is clearly Iran, which all things being equal would be a dominant power player in regional politics. All things, however, are not equal. With their oil increasingly embargoed, the sanctions getting progressively tighter, and one of their key allies in the region threatening to topple in favor of a hostile Sunni insurgency, Iran has to know that when and if the Syrian domino falls, it falls on them.
At the same time, attention is turning once again to another of the war racketeers' key interests: Pakistan. There has been newfound congressional interest in the so-called “Free Baluchistan” movement seeking independence for Pakistan's Baluchi nationals. Citing human rights violations, Rep. Rohrbacher (R-California) has introduced a resolution calling on Pakistan to recognize Balochi self-determination. He has even written an op-ed in the Washington Post where he begins his argument with recourse to human rights and switches seamlessly in the fourth paragraph into noting with evident glee the region's natural gas, gold, uranium, and copper reserves.
Interestingly, Russia agreed last week to pony up $1.5 billion in financing and technical assistance for a proposed Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. The projected course of the pipeline? It would start in Iran’s southern Assalouyeh Energy Zone and enter Pakistan from the west, crossing straight through Baluchistan. Coincidence, surely. The IP pipeline has had a tumultuous history, complete with plans to run the pipeline all the way to India (an idea from which India has distanced itself but never completely abandoned) and the potential involvement of China, which has flirted with the idea of incorporating the pipeline into a planned logistical network running from the port of Gwadar in Pakistan's southwest all the way to Xinjiang province. Now, with a proposal for Russian funding on the table the pipeline looks closer than ever to becoming a reality.
From the outset, the US has used every bit of leverage it has to get the parties involved to scrap the idea. Diplomatic pressure has been brought to bear on China, Pakistan, and India, with Beijing and New Delhi both appearing to buckle under the pressure and pull out of the project. The US has backed its own alternative pipeline, a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India route, but that idea is looking less feasible by the day. Iran has nearly completed its share of the proposed IP pipeline, but Pakistan has been hesitant. Now along come the racketeers to fund yet another rebel movement in another geostrategically vital corridor, and before you know it “Free Baluchistan” might derail the project altogether. Look for US pressure on the Pakistani government regarding Baluchistan to increase as the pipeline comes closer to completion.
Butler was right. War is a racket, after all. These days the muscle men are rent-a-mobs and insurgents more so than the U.S. military, but the idea is the same: fund, arm and train the fighters to secure the resources and control the strategic areas. In Libya the NATO-backed rebels wrested the oil spigot from the unpredictable Gaddafi. In Syria the “Friends of Syria” are overthrowing a key Iranian ally and taking over an important square on the geopolitical chessboard. In Pakistan, American-backed rebels may succeed in driving a wedge through a key Iran-Pakistan pipeline. And the racket continues. One would do well to remember the grand finale of Butler's speech: “To hell with war!”
In order to access the Corbett Report: http://www.corbettreport.com
April 12th, 2012 by olddog
By Marti Oakley Copyright 2012 All rights Reserved
Vote all you want, the flight plan does not change no matter who wins. We got us a big election coming up and of course the country is dividing itself right down the middle at least in some areas. For most of us out here this coming election means nothing. The usual arguments over whether we are flying headlong into socialism or, if we are in fact in the throws of fascism seem to have lost their appeal. Most have realized that whether socialism or fascism the end result is the same; a ruling class and the rest of us servants. It just depends on which sales pitch appeals to you. For most of us, we have had it with the snake oil politicians and their ever changing sales pitch’s. over Fascism, the overtaking of government by corporations, is hidden behind euphoric, glorious terms; Free markets, free trade, globalism and the world economy. Most who subscribe to this pitch appear to be fearful of being cut out of the action, maybe not getting a piece of the global pie or at least a piece as big as they thought they should get. Socialism, the plan for the common people, will see many fall never to rise again.
In 2010, even many hard-core Republicans were relieved to see the end of the Bush/Cheney neo-cons and the unending assaults on freedom and our rights. Eight years of what was, in my opinion, the most treacherous, murderous, pathologically evil cabal that had seized control of our country, was finally over. What we were to find out was that it would only be continued under the new president, and taken so much further.
The election of Obama gave the country its first sense of hope after eight years of massive walls of lies, deceit, manipulation and some of the most corrupt individuals to ever find their way into our government. We replaced the neo-cons with Obama/Biden. We should have listened more closely to that victory speech, but we didn’t. We were too relieved, too hopeful and far too enthralled with this new president and the promises made; promises we thought meant a return to liberty, to integrity and honor. We should have listened more closely and not allowed our emotions to cloud our critical thinking.
Obama asked in his acceptance speech if we were ready to join him in fundamentally changing our country. What did we think he meant? Did any one of us think to ask….fundamentally change it how? No, we did not. It would appear the fundamental changes Obama promised were comprised of restructuring state and local governments to accommodate the United Nations and one world government. Along the way we [fundamentally changed] Libya, Egypt, parts of Pakistan and are now looking towards fundamentally changing Iran and a few other places where the global bankers had been unable to sink their parasitic claws into, and the global oil cartels had not been able to rob and plunder the oil fields. Obama has simply picked up the one world government mantra and moved forward at great speed deconstructing the United States
We are watching in horror the fundamental changing not only here at home but around the world as the one world government begins to be assembled.
The Flight plan
The plan has been for many decades to totally deconstruct the sovereign United States, reducing us to third world status so that no matter how hard we have worked in the past, or how hard we work in the future we will never regain our former stature. We will never be as free or empowered as a population as we once were.
The coming presidential election means nothing. Mit Romney, who does not stand a remote chance of even coming anywhere close to winning the election has now been assured the Republican nomination. This only affirms what I have said in the past: No one wants Obama re-elected more than the GOP does.
Our economy is virtually dissolving before our eyes. We have 25 million legal American workers out of work with more American jobs leaving the country by the thousands each and every month, never to return. The whole structure is going to collapse under the weight of ever-increasing and senseless federal spending and we are faced with a debt so massive, so incomprehensible, that it can never be paid off. The last thing the GOP and Republicans want is for the impending total collapse to be steered by a Republican president.
Obama must be re-elected.
What better way to make sure Obama is re-elected than to run what possibly is the most lack-luster, uninspiring, unpopular candidate possible? The really frightening part of this is that with the exception of Ron Paul, the other candidates that came and went; Gingrich, Santorum, Trump, to name a few, were bordering on lunacy or gross immorality. And these were the best the GOP could come up with? And they want to win the presidential election? Really? Then why didn’t they support Ron Paul?
As it is, we can only look forward to more of the same. Even if Romney stood a snowball’s chance in hell of getting elected, not one of the egregious assaults on the constitution, the expanded power grabbing by the federal government, the construction of unconstitutional councils, czars offices, or even the unlawful expansion of federally owned sub-corporations like the EPA, USDA, FDA, will be reversed. The deconstruction of the Republic of the United States will continue as if we never voted at all. Romney would not correct even one thing. If he would or could, he would never get the nomination.
So vote all you want, not one thing will change. Not one job will be saved, not one Wall Street crook will go to jail, not one corrupt banker or politician will ever face charges. While you are busy punching those buttons congress will still be busy with insider trading and Dempsey and Panetta will be dining with their new masters at the United Nations. Agenda 21 mandates will continue to be implemented in your state and city and eventually your right to own property, unfettered by federal interference and UN edicts, will have disappeared.
We do not elect presidents: We elect the Chief Executive of the corporation known as “the United States, a.k.a. The USA” and this corporation is not bound by our Constitution and does not believe we should or do have any inalienable rights. We are being controlled by a hostile foreign government.
As one very great lady said:
“If voting could change anything, they would make it illegal”.
April 8th, 2012 by olddog
By Doug Book
A week ago, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy observed that implementation of the Affordable Care Act stood to “…change the relationship of the federal government to the individual in a very fundamental way.”
Although Kennedy was probably unaware of it at the time, that “change” is precisely what the authors of ObamaCare have hoped to impose on the American public for decades. For healthcare itself was never the real purpose of the massive, complex, and overreaching law as the following information should make clear.
Charged with defending the constitutionality of the Act before the Court, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli told the Justices that some 40 million Americans were either permanently or occasionally without health insurance.
But were that number 50 million, as has been claimed by some ObamaCare advocates during the past year, these facts must be considered:
- 8 million of that number are Medicaid recipients and therefore NOT uninsured
- 10 million are illegal aliens
- 11 million earn in excess of $75,000/yr and pay a substantial portion of any healthcare costs out of pocket
- 9 million earn over $50,000/yr and also pay for much of their own healthcare
Of the 20 million higher income individuals above, many are young and CHOOSE to not have health insurance. And interestingly, in a Gallup poll, 60% of those who are uninsured and making between $30,000-$75,000 per year rate their healthcare as “good” or “excellent” in spite of having no insurance!
So rather than 50 million, it is only some 20 million American citizens who might actually be uninsured for extended periods of time. And even they can obtain healthcare at no charge from hospitals and clinics, which are compensated in part each year by federal or state government grants and must by law provide care, regardless of ability to pay.
In 2010, the “…Medicare chief actuary, [said] that Obamacare would raise nationwide health costs by over $300 billion through 2019 in relation to what those costs would be without Obamacare.”
And the Senate Budget Committee had reported the addition of another $17 trillion in unfunded mandates over the next three quarters of a century, thanks to spending obligations added by Obamacare.
Do the American people NEED a 3,000 page law and dizzying expense factors in order to provide healthcare for 20 million people? Doesn’t this extraordinary departure from common sense and fiscal responsibility make it obvious that the LAST thing the congressional Democrat supermajority of 2008 really had in mind was the effective implementation and administration of healthcare?
When Barack Hussein Obama vowed to “fundamentally transform the United States of America,” black voters believed it would translate into more free goods and services; organized labor dreamed of increasing dues, membership, and power; and gullible, guilt-ridden whites envisioned the post-racial melding of happy races and forgiveness of past sins.
But the radical left, typified by the inner circle of the Manchurian Candidate, backed Obama’s duplicitous ramblings because they understood the REAL significance of his “utopian” vision of the future. And that vision has assumed the form of law in ObamaCare as the claim of universal coverage becomes a scheme of nationwide enslavement.
Five men have the deadly serious job of making certain that it doesn’t come to pass.
BY DOUG BOOK
While the American media provide cover for the Constitutionally ineligible Barack Hussein Obama, Vladimir Putin and the nation of Russia are reaping a treasure trove of defense secrets and missile technology by threatening to reveal the true history of the Manchurian Candidate.
Obama has spent millions to prevent his personal story from being revealed to the American public. Records have been destroyed, information has been hidden, false claims have been advanced, potential whistle-blowers have been threatened and official documents have been forged. Enabled by a complicit media and the craven cowardice of political opponents, the most egregious felonies in the nation’s history have served to make the American people easy prey for the schemes of a dedicated Communist and committed enemy of our Constitutional Republic.
And those schemes have included the betrayal both of the United States and her allies.
§ In 2009 Obama scrapped the long awaited missile defense system for Poland and the Czech Republic because Russia objected.
§ He has refused to keep secret the technical data on the U.S Standard Missile-3, as called for in the 2012 defense authorization bill.
§ Obama will not pledge to keep American missile technology from China, North Korea and Iran, as it would “…interfere with [his] constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs…”
§ Obama will provide Russia information on every Trident missile supplied to Great Britain as part of an arms control deal signed with Russian President Medvedev.
§ Leaked cables show that the US will now provide Russia with ALL serial numbers of Trident missiles transferred to Britain.
§ Obama proposes the United States CUT its nuclear arsenal by 80%, yet demands no reciprocity on the part of Russia or any of America’s enemies.
§ Joe Miller, 2010 US Senate candidate from Alaska, reports that, under the guise of drawing a boundary, 7 Alaska-area islands and oil rich sea beds containing perhaps billions of barrels were given to Russia in an unannounced, secret deal by Obama’s State Department.
Under Obama’s programs, by 2016, defense will account for 20% of the national budget, yet bear over HALF of the deficit-reduction cuts.
In mid-March, Obama declared he would “…provide the Russians with detailed technical information about the anti- missile systems he plans to base in Eastern Europe…”
And Congressman Darrell Issa said that “the American people should be very afraid,” continuing with “I judge that in fact he is going to sell out our national defense after the election.”
On March 26th, Obama’s conversation with outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was accidentally picked up on an open microphone. “This is my last election…After my election I have more flexibility,” Obama told Medvedev, who said he would relay that message to the new Russian “president” Vladimir Putin. “On all of these issues, but particularly missile defense this, this can be solved but it’s important for him (Putin) to give me space.”
Why would an American President need to secretly petition a notorious KGB thug for “space?” Because Vladimir Putin is aware of Obama’s criminal abuses of the United States and the American people. He has Obama by the throat, possessing information which can put the Manchurian Candidate in prison for a lifetime. And he is using that information to literally blackmail the American president into betraying the U.S. and her allies around the world.
And though Barack Obama has certainly needed no persuasion to betray the American people and inflict massive damage on the United States since his election, that treachery is now proceeding according to a schedule and terms dictated by Putin, making the guilt of the American President even more obvious and his chances for re-election more tenuous. Thus, the plea for space.
How much MORE damage could the treasonous Barack Obama cause with another 4 years in power? And who might blackmail him next?
April 5th, 2012 by olddog
By Doug Hagmann
On Saturday, March 31, 2012, a press conference was held by a commissioned law enforcement body to present additional findings from their investigation into the bona fides and background of a man currently occupying the highest elected position in America. The investigation not only includes the forensic irregularities of the birth documentation submitted by Barack Hussein Obama, but into two additional areas. The official law enforcement investigation is also encompassing problems confirmed to exist with the authenticity of his selective service registration, a matter we’ve previously reported. Additionally and perhaps more explosive, investigation has broadened into the actions of Hillary Clinton and her closest political operatives during the latter part of the 2008 presidential campaign.
Most people following this issue are aware of the irregularities surrounding Obama’s selective service registration. Yet few appear to be aware that detectives from the Arizona investigative team have been methodically securing affidavits documenting alleged criminal activity by the Obama campaign during the 2008 Democratic Party primary.
“Something” happened during the latter portion of the campaign that involved Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama. Recall that Obama and Clinton ditched the press and their respective staff members to meet in secret during the late night hours of Thursday, June 5, 2008, at the home of Senator Dianne Feinstein. The meeting lasted about an hour, and what was discussed was never publicly disclosed.
The expansion of the official investigation is being deliberately ignored by the mainstream media, including outlets often identified with the conservative agenda. Evidence suggests that this deliberate media “blackout” is being orchestrated and ordered at the highest levels of the American government.
Preliminary investigative findings
On March 1, 2012, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio held a press conference to announce their preliminary findings of a six-month long investigation into the legitimacy of Barack Hussein Obama’s long form birth certificate that was published on the White House website on April 27, 2011. At that press conference, Sheriff Arpaio stated that the official investigation, conducted by seasoned and sworn law enforcement officers, found “probable cause to believe that the [document] is a computer generated forgery.” Arpaio added: “I do not believe that it is a scan of an original 1961 paper document, as represented by the White House when the long-form birth certificate was made public.” [Emphasis added].
I’ve spoken at length with lead Detective Mike Zullo in my capacity as an investigator before and after that initial press conference. It is clear that the objective of his team of seasoned and sworn law enforcement officers is to seek and expose the truth about Obama’s background and legal qualifications for the highest office in the land, wherever it might lead. Authenticated evidence of any type, including exculpatory evidence is being sought as well.
Detective Zullo confirmed, however, that their efforts are being obstructed by government officials, and publicly marginalized by the media. Based on most recent investigative findings, government agencies have blocked legitimate subpoena efforts, or worse, might have altered or destroyed evidence with apparent impunity.
Such actions or inactions of government agencies in this regard should give pause to even the most ardent detractors of the eligibility matter if they were at all interested in the truth.
Threats to the media
We were perhaps the first to document and report the threats to the media in a columnpublished on August 4, 2009, citing evidence we obtained dating back to late 2008.Information provided here over two years ago was publicly confirmed by lead investigator Mike Zullo in a March 22, 2012 interview published this week by the Western Center for Journalism. Excerpted from that report:
The executive producers of the national show, 3 hours before air time, pulled the script, literally leaving the temporary host with no script whatsoever.
For a nationally syndicated show, this is absolutely unheard of, particularly with a fill-in doing the show. Programing [sic] is scheduled days in advance as hours of work and preparation often go into them; it is after all a business and one which must inform accurately. To have a script tossed just hours before airing is simply not done without explanation or substitution.
Lead Investigator Zullo revealed in this conversation that several individuals have come forth to provide testimony; the identity of these witnesses is being withheld for their protection. They identify producers, reporters, T.V. and radio personalities who have been told specifically by intimidating individuals who state clearly, they are not going to report on this story. These witnesses have been told: “If you breathe a word about it on air, we will make certain you never work in this business again,” said Investigator Zullo. Apparently those making the threats have the power to carry through on them.
Some of these witnesses have been told this along with a sinister inquiry into how a family member is doing over at XYZ (details have been changed to protect witness identity), or some other means of letting that person know the powers that be know exactly where their family members are…
As also confirmed by law enforcement, our investigation has found that the threats to the media have taken several forms. At the highest of corporate levels, it appears that government agencies such as the FCC, the FTC and even the IRS are being used to force parent companies into compliance with the administration’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” warnings. Complicity reigns in other cases where contributions buy exclusives, the mainstay of mainstream media. And in others, it simply comes down to something that can be termed “presstitution,” or the act of acquiescence to keep their positions and lifestyles in exchange for their silence.
Perhaps the most insidious threats of all, however, involve individuals working in the media but are not in the limelight, yet could provide information about the activities behind the scenes intrinsic to the media’s complicity. As detailed above by Detective Zullo, threats do not stop at the specter of unemployment, but extend to the well-being of their families.
Threats to Sheriff Joe Arpaio
In the midst of the investigation spearheaded by Sheriff Arpaio’s team, the Obama justice department has ratcheted up its legal campaign against the Sheriff for enforcing the law against illegal aliens within his jurisdiction. This is a shameful tactic being employed by the Holder Justice Department under orders by the Obama administration.
Out on a limb
Findings by the commissioned law enforcement body have been met with a campaign of propaganda short on facts but heavy on baseless ridicule and hollow charges of racism. Such tactics should come as no surprise.
A 2009 Christmas ornament on the White House Christmas tree featured a picture of Mao Zedong, communist leader of China in the twentieth century. The reign of Mao Zedong was facilitated by the communist government’s use of propaganda and media censorship. While the White House and their own “Ministry of Propaganda,” Media Matters, trivialized the existence of a communist in the White House, former White House Communications Director Anita Dunn proudly embraced Mao as one of her favorite political philosophers in a speech she delivered the previous June.
Anyone with the most basic knowledge of history can see the tactics used to refute valid concerns about the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama are quite consistent with the tactics of Mao’s oppressive regime. It is apparent that the Mao Christmas ornament did not fall from the White House tree.
Who is really occupying the Oval Office?
The Arizona investigative team of commissioned law enforcement officers found probable cause that the most basic of all forms of identity for the man sitting in the Oval Office, the birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama II, is a computer generated forgery. Think about that for a moment. The document that has the imprimatur of the Obama White House is likely a forgery.
Furthermore, that document was posted only after Obama authorized his legal team to fight against any release of his identification papers that also include his school and passport records, among others. The fight did not come without a cost. Estimates of legal expenses to prevent disclosure of identifying documents are well into the seven figures.
Despite such effort and expense, some well-known analysts and pundits want us to believe that Obama was “playing” his enemies with a needless diversion, claiming that the eligibility issue was nothing more than a distraction from “real” issues. Many others have since folded with the release of the purported “real” birth certificate released last April, stating that the matter is closed.
To accept that the matter should be rendered moot with the release of the Obama authorized document, one must then admit that the initial document presented by Obama sanctioned myth-busting sites was not legitimate.
Others simply choose to remain silent, or believe the answer is to “vote Obama out” in November. Is that how we now address possible criminal activity at the highest levels of government? If so, I would submit that Richard Nixon is owed an apology, posthumously.
As unbelievable as it sounds, it is a fact that the actual legal identity of the individual who has occupied the office of the President of the United States for the last 3-1/2 years remains a very legitimate and valid question. It is also a fact that this individual has used Barry Soetoro as his legal name, and there has been no authenticated evidence to show that he legally changed it back to Barack Hussein Obama II at any time during his adult life.
To Russia with love?
If the issue of Obama’s legal identity seems trivial and a fringe issue in the scheme of things, consider the path this country has taken over the last three-and-a-half years. Even more frightening, consider the path not yet taken.
A window into that path was opened by a “hot” microphone that captured Obama’s utterances to Russian President Dmitri Medvedev on March 26, 2012. The world heard Obama say that he would have more flexibility in his second term to adjust our missile defense program to the better liking of the Russians.
The media turned this insight into his plans for the defense of our allies and homeland into tongue-in-cheek reports, downplaying the significance of his statements.
No one in the media or elsewhere are making any connection to a very peculiar 2005 incident involving Obama, a junior Senator and member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Richard Lugar, a Republican Senator from Illinois and chairman of that committee, and the Russian FSB.
During their travels to Russia for the purposes of nuclear disarmament talks, the delegation was detained at the Russian airport of Perm by the FSB for about three hours in August 2005. The Russian FSB confiscated Barack Hussein Obama’s passport. Initial reports indicated an irregularity with his passport, although subsequent reports downplayed the incident. What was the real reason for this very strange detention, and what does the FSB know about Obama’s passport that Americans have been prevented to see?
Over the objections of career politicians, race bating progressive attack dogs, intellectually dishonest political pundits and a compromised media, it should be very clear by now that it is in the best interest of this country for the truth to revealed about Barack Hussein Obama II, or is it Barry Soetoro?
The survival of our nation is at stake.
April 2nd, 2012 by olddog
By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh
Let the influx of money be ever so great, if there be no confidence, property will sink in value…The circulation of confidence is better than the circulation of money.” —James Madison, Speech, Virginia Convention, June 20, 1788
According to data from the University of Illinois professors Lawrence H. Officer and Samuel H. Williamson, the value of the dollar had depreciated so much by 2008 that it took $5.31 to buy what it cost $1 in 1971 when Nixon decided that the dollar would no longer be backed by gold. Until then, $35 could buy a troy ounce of gold every day. Our dollar today is worth less than 19 cents when compared to 1971 and the price of gold fluctuates between $1,500-1,700 per ounce.
Between February 2002 and December 2004, the value of the dollar dropped against the euro by 40 percent, a significant decline that was largely ignored by the media. (William J. Baumol and Alan S. Blinder)
The U.S. dollar has continued its decline in spite of the rosy economic picture presented by the MSM in the last four years.
Members of Congress cannot claim ignorance about the declining trend of the U.S. dollar because Craig K. Elwell, a specialist in Macroeconomic Policy, wrote a report on February 23, 2012 for the Congressional Research Service, “The Depreciating Dollar: Economic Effects and Policy Response.”
Any currency, including the dollar, is affected by demand from foreign governments, foreign nationals, or foreign corporations who wish to purchase goods, services, and assets from the country that issues the currency.
In order to buy our stocks, bonds, real estate, goods, and services, foreigners must first buy our currency, thus creating a demand for it.
The supply of dollars comes from the Federal Reserve System (the Fed) who prints money or issues electronic credit to its member banks. Transactions are made directly in cash or electronically in the form of debit and credit through the bank of the buyer and seller of currency.
If we have a large trade deficit with other nations, and we do because we usually import more goods than we do export, the value of the dollar decreases. The dollar decreases in value as a direct response to the “net increase in the supply of dollars on the foreign exchange markets.” (Craig K. Elwell)
A net increase in the demand for dollars on foreign exchange markets can increase the value of the dollar.
According to Craig K. Elwell, in 2007, “at the peak of the last economic expansion, the U.S. capital account recorded $1.5 trillion in purchases of foreign assets by U.S. residents (representing a capital outflow) and $2.1 trillion in purchases of U.S. assets by foreign residents (representing a capital inflow).”
Congress cannot affect exchange rates directly, but the value of the dollar “can be affected by decisions made on policy issues facing the 112th Congress, including decisions related to generating jobs, raising the debt limit, reducing the budget deficit, and stabilizing the growth of the federal government’s long-term debt.” (Craig K. Elwell)
In other words, stop regulating the remaining U.S. industry to death while destroying small businesses that create jobs. Stop the non-existent man-made global warming nonsense. Everyone knows that politicians want power; it is not about the environment. Stop catering to the United Nations third world dictatorships. Stop wasting taxpayers’ dollars on solar panel black holes, invest in natural gas, clean coal, nuclear, and fossil fuel generated energy. Stop the non-existent green job creation lie, the Tesla “brick,” and the GM Volt electric car that nobody wants to buy. We want mobility. Stop sending our jobs overseas. Stop building corporate headquarters and entire industrial cities in China or India with U.S. dollars. Stop spending money we do not have. Stop borrowing money from China in order to spend it on wars, welfare, policing the planet, and supporting third world dictatorships who wish us harm. We are not Don Quixote de la Mancha “tilting at windmills,” attacking an imaginary enemy. We want to build a successful future, not the pipe dream of progressives.
Investors look for countries with a stable government, a high rate of return, good economic growth, and low inflation rates to park their excess capital. During the period of 1994-2003, U.S. had an expected rate of return of 8.6 percent (International Monetary Fund).
Current low interest rates in the U.S., kept so by Fed policy, give the U.S. no interest rate advantage over other developed countries. It is thus in the better interest of investors to move their capital to emerging economies, putting a further strain on the U.S. dollar.
If the dollar was expected to depreciate further due to a weak economy and out-of-control government spending, dollar assets would not be attractive to investors, they would seek new ways to diversify. By doing so, the value of the dollar would be eroded even more. “Diversifying to other currencies would be troublesome for the $11 trillion in U.S. securities held by foreigners.” (Craig K. Elwell)
The dollar is currently holding on because U.S. has a high degree of liquidity (securities can be turned quickly into cash with a daily turnover of $588 billion) and a variety of assets such as the bond market ($32 trillion total, $11 trillion government bonds).
Although the United States has been a safe bet in the past for foreign investors, as the largest debtor in the world, the federal government is now a default risk because of its lavish spending, which can downgrade Treasury securities and thus weaken the dollar.
Long-term assets are no longer seen as safe in the U.S. The dollar dropped 17 percent in value during 2009-2011. The European Union debt crisis in 2011-2012 with the potential default of Greece, its two bailouts, Italy’s bailout, Spain and Ireland, and the austerity measures demanded by Germany and France, gave the U.S. dollar a boost in value of 5 percent.
Central bank holdings are propping the U.S. dollar for the time being, in particular China with $3.2 trillion in exchange reserves, and Japan with $1.3 trillion.
The rising inflation rate in this country is depreciating the dollar as well. The purchasing power of the dollar is falling. All you have to do is take a trip to Italy. Prices are 44 percent higher not necessarily because of higher manufacturing costs, but simply because the exchange rate of the dollar against the euro is so weak.
A depreciated dollar will indirectly cause interest rates to go up. Current Federal Reserve policy is to keep interest rates low as a “monetary stimulus.” Despite low interest rates, demand for loans by small businesses and households is low because so many people are unemployed and businesses do not wish to expand in an economy burdened by expensive regulations and the specter of Obamacare liabilities. The Fed policy cannot successfully control both exchange rates and interest rates.
“The IMF study estimated that if the dollar had remained at its peak of early 2002, by the end of 2007, the price of gold would have been $250 per ounce lower, the price of a barrel of crude oil would have been $25 a barrel lower, and nonfuel commodity prices would have been 12 percent lower.” (Craig K. Elwell)
When the President says that nothing that we do can affect the price of oil, even if we drill everywhere, he is disingenuous. We can start by repealing the unfortunately named Affordable Healthcare Act that is bankrupting the country. We can drill on our own soil. We can implement logical and sane energy policies that restore the health of the U.S. economy and foreign investors’ trust in our government. The dollar is still the world’s “reserve currency.” China and Russia are trying to replace the dollar with another currency as trust in our government’s fiscal responsibility is waning.
Just maybe, after it’s too late, some of you will believe this is a planned depreciation of the dollar to remove it as a reserve currency and transfer economic leadership to china’s currency. Or, just a step in the process of a global currency from the BIS
March 30th, 2012 by olddog
Posted by truther
In a recent statement put out by “Planet Under Pressure” several scientists call for denser cities in order to mitigate worldwide population growth. When in doubt that UN’s Agenda 21 is not the Mein Kampf of our day, one should consider yet another in-your-face confession from yet another certified biocratic control freak
According to an MSNBC article one of the scientists while speaking about human populations worldwide, stated:
“We certainly don’t want them strolling about the entire countryside. We want them to save land for nature by living closely [together].”
Insisting the world’s population be locked up within the confounds of mega-cities, the elite realizes that if the herd is to be properly controlled walls are needed- thick walls, and by constructing these walls, making the masses go this or that way will be made easier..
Chief scientist Michail Fragkias involved with “Planet under Pressure” told MSNBC that “the answer (to population growth) is denser cities.”
The conference, co-sponsored by NASA and UNEP by the way, released its statement calling for denser cities to mitigate “worldwide population growth” ahead of the Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development taking place in June of this year.
“If cities can develop in height rather than in width that would be much more preferable and environmentally not as harmful”, Fragkias said.
People who know anything about history know that the creation of mega-cities in which the masses may be rounded up and enclosed, is identical to the Nazi principle of the “ghetto” as a means of managing the masses. Every student of history may also know what happens to those masses shortly after.
Some of the organizers of “Planet under Pressure” are founding their plea on the notion that we (as humanity) have entered the “Anthropocene”: a new geological era in which humans- not natural conditions- are the main drivers of geological and meteorological processes. Citing a website devoted to this concept, Martin Rees of the Royal Society stated at the conference:
“This century is special in the Earth’s history. It is the first when one species — ours — has the planet’s future in its hands,” reports the AFP news agency. “We’ve invented a new geological era: the Anthropocene.”, he stated.
This echoes yet another scientist, a professor at the University of Colorado, who in recent times also mentioned this new era in relation to a call for population control when he stated:
“Scientists now speak of humanity’s increased demands and impacts on the globe as ushering in a new geological epoch: the Anthropocene. Such selfish and destructive appropriation of the resources of the Earth can only be described as interspecies genocide.”
In addition, the professor said: “Ending human population growth is almost certainly a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for preventing catastrophic global climate change. Indeed, significantly reducing current human numbers (emphasis added) may be necessary in order to do so.”
The call for compact cities, filled to the brim with humans, is part of the UN’s depopulation agenda for sure. Within these proposed mega-cities, humans will be allowed to use RFID technology so they can be kept in check. The rest of the world, the “countryside” as one of the scientists told MSNBC, is reserved for the elite.
March 26th, 2012 by olddog
Just days ago a military ammunition supplier announced that the Department of Homeland Security had entered a contract to purchase 450 million rounds of .40 Caliber ammunition, which is more than on bullet for every man, woman and child in the United States.
ATK Awarded Contract to Supply 450 Million Rounds of .40 Caliber Ammunition to the Department of Homeland Security
ATK has secured a major Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity deal to supply up to 450 million rounds of .40 caliber ammunition to the Department of Homeland Security.
The 1 year contract with four option years comes at a time when many Americans believe that DHS, along with certain aspects of the military, will soon turn their sights on the American people during some sort of martial law scenario.
“We are proud to extend our track record as the prime supplier of .40 caliber duty ammunition for DHS, ICE,” said Ron Johnson, the president of ATK’s Security and Sporting group,” reported a PR Newswire release.
While the news is startling and one can only speculate on the reason Homeland security needs so much ammunition an even more alarming report has surfaced today.
According to an anonymous source the federal government is buying out all ammunition from military surplus stores and says vendors have told him they have been instructed to cease sales of ammunition to the public.
The source claims to have contacted numerous military surplus stores in an attempt to purchase 5.56 ammo and has been repeatedly informed the stores are sold out because the federal government is buying out all surplus ammo.
The vendors are also sold out of Federal M193 and M855 SS109 ammunition and military surplus suppliers and say that any remaining supply of 5.56 ammunition and .223 caliber is about to spike significantly in price due to the shortage being created by the government.
The source points out that after recently purchasing 440 rounds of federal surplus steel core ammo for $149.00 the price has now skyrocketed to over $440.00 for the same amount of ammunition.
While all of this is coming from an unreliable anonymous source I am putting it out there in case the claims are true.
Federal Jack Reports:
Subject: Government buying out all the 5.56 Military surplus ammo and is telling ammo dealers to stop selling to their vendors and civilians.
I have been calling allot of ammo distributors and ALL of them are telling me that our government is [buying out] all the 5.56-.223 cal military surplus ammo. And they’re also telling the ammo distributors stop selling the ammo to civilians and their vendors because the government is buying it all up from everyone they can. I have also spoken with theses ammo dealers and they told me that the 5.56 and .223 ammo is going way up in price.
For instance…I paid $149.00 for federal surplus 440 rounds of steel core and now at the gun show today it was selling for $440.00 for 420 rounds. I have checked and A LOT of places online are out of the Military surplus ammo by federal [including] M193 and M855 SS109 ammo. I did find one place still carrying both these ammo’s and good prices still, but they’re the only place I could find. If interested let me know and Ill forward the info.
I was also told by the same ammo dealers that the government is going to buy all the 9mm and .45 ammo up, so hurry and buy while you can at the lower prices while still available. Guess if they won’t take our guns because they figure that there are so many out there, they will just buy all most popular military calibers. Can’t shoot a gun with no ammo…stock up now while you still can.
ARE YOU READY TO RUMBLE?
IF NOT WHY?
Please don’t tell me you think those S O Bs in DC are going to change their minds and return to Constitutional governance.
No one can be that frickin dumb!
March 22nd, 2012 by olddog
By Brandon Turbeville
In a stunning move, on March 16, 2012, Barack Obama signed an Executive Order stating that the President and his specifically designated Secretaries now have the authority to commandeer all domestic U.S. resources including food and water. The EO also states that the President and his Secretaries have the authority to seize all transportation, energy, and infrastructure inside the United States as well as forcibly induct/draft American citizens into the military. The EO also contains a vague reference in regards to harnessing American citizens to fulfill “labor requirements” for the purposes of national defense.
Not only that, but the authority claimed inside the EO does not only apply to National Emergencies and times of war. It also applies in peacetime.
The National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order exploits the “authority” granted to the President in the Defense Production Act of 1950 in order to assert that virtually every means of human survival is now available for confiscation and control by the President via his and his Secretaries’ whim.
The unconstitutionality of the overwhelming majority of Executive Orders is well established, as well as the illegality of denying citizens their basic Constitutional and human rights, even in the event of a legitimate national emergency. Likewise, it should also be pointed out that, like Obama’s recent Libyan adventure and the foregone conclusion of a Syrian intervention, there is no mention of Congress beyond a minor role of keeping the allegedly co-equal branch of government informed on contextually meaningless developments.
As was mentioned above, the scope of the EO is virtually all-encompassing. For instance, in “Section 201 – Priorities and Allocations Authorities,” the EO explains that the authority for the actions described in the opening paragraph rests with the President but is now delegated to the various Secretaries of the U.S. Federal Government. The list of delegations and the responsibility of the Secretaries as provided in this section are as follows:
(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
One need only to read the “Definitions” section of the EO in order to clearly see that terms such as “food resources” is an umbrella that includes literally every form of food and food-related product that could in any way be beneficial to human survival.
That being said, “Section 601 – Secretary of Labor” delegates special responsibilities to the Secretary of Labor as it involves not just materials citizens will need for survival, but the actual citizens themselves.
Obviously, the ability of the U.S. government to induct and draft citizens into the military against their will is, although a clear violation of their rights, not an issue considered shocking by its nature of having been invoked so many times in the past. Logically, this “authority” is provided for in this section.
However, what may be shocking is the fact that Section 601 also provides for the mobilization of “labor” for purposes of the national defense. Although some subsections read that evaluations are to be made regarding the “effect and demand of labor utilization,” the implication is that “labor” (meaning American workers) will be considered yet one more resource to be seized for the purposes of “national defense.” The EO reads,
Sec. 601. Secretary of Labor. (a) The Secretary of Labor, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of other agencies, as deemed appropriate by the Secretary of Labor, shall:
(1) collect and maintain data necessary to make a continuing appraisal of the Nation's workforce needs for purposes of national defense;
(2) upon request by the Director of Selective Service, and in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, assist the Director of Selective Service in development of policies regulating the induction and deferment of persons for duty in the armed services;
(3) upon request from the head of an agency with authority under this order, consult with that agency with respect to: (i) the effect of contemplated actions on labor demand and utilization; (ii) the relation of labor demand to materials and facilities requirements; and (iii) such other matters as will assist in making the exercise of priority and allocations functions consistent with effective utilization and distribution of labor;
Notice that the language of the EO does not state “in the event of a national emergency.” Instead, we are given the term “purposes of national defense.” This is because the “authorities” assumed by the President have been assumed not just for arbitrary declarations of “national emergency” but for peacetime as well. Indeed, the EO states this much directly when it says,
The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 107(b)(1) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2077(b)(1), to take appropriate action to ensure that critical components, critical technology items, essential materials, and industrial resources are available from reliable sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime, graduated mobilization, and national emergency.
Presidential Executive Orders have long been used illegally by Presidents of every political shade and have often been used to destroy the rights of American citizens. Although history has often come to judge these orders as both immoral and unconstitutional, the fact is that the victims of the orders suffered no less because of the retroactive judgment of their progeny. It is for this reason that we must immediately condemn and resist such obvious usurpation as is currently being attempted by the U.S. government.
Nevertheless, some have no doubt begun to wonder why the President has signed such an order. Not only that, but why did he sign the order now? Is it because of the looming war with Iran or the Third World War that will likely result from such a conflict? Is it because of the ticking time bomb called the economy that is only one jittery move or trade deal away from total disintegration? Is it because of a growing sense of hatred of their government amongst the general public? Is there a coming natural disaster of which we are unaware? Are there plans for martial law?
Whatever the reason for the recent announcement of Obama’s new Executive Order, there is one thing we do know for sure – “It wouldn’t happen here” has been the swan song of almost every victim of democide in modern human history.
Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at) gmail.com.
Many of the comments I receive indicate there are people out there that just simply refuse to believe what is going on in our National government.
To those people I say this, you will rue the day you refused to prepare for the coming total destruction of our way of life, and once lost, this generation will not have the ability to reconstruct it. Since I am a mere man I cannot predict the future, but the evidence before me is too overwhelming to refute, and if we do not unite and fight back NOW, our future is cut and dried. Are you ready to die of starvation, or slaughtered by vandals? Are you prepared to die standing up and fighting like a man, or are you going to beg for your life and serve the tyrants? These are your choices, make them now. The alternative is to have fifty million citizens demanding our military take out the International Banking Cartel, and redistribute their assets globally. Then start up State Banks like North Dakota, with a commodity backed dollar. Takeout the stud ducks and the flock will disperse. We can keep them from repeating this by having an honest currency. There is no other way to stop this insane suicide.
March 16th, 2012 by olddog
Michael Snyder, The Economic Collapse
Would America be a better place without Goldman Sachs? Of course it would. The "vampire squid" of Wall Street does not care about the future of America. Sadly, Goldman Sachs apparently does not even care much about their own clients. What Goldman Sachs is all about is making as much money as humanly possible. In the end, there is nothing wrong with making money, but there are constructive ways to make money and there are destructive ways to make money.
Unfortunately, Goldman Sachs seems to find the destructive path almost irresistible. Greg Smith, the head of the U.S. equity derivatives business for Goldman Sachs in Europe, the Middle East and Africa made headlines all over the world on Wednesday when he resigned publicly from Goldman Sachs in a scorching editorial in the New York Times.
Smith said that he could "honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it". Considering what we know has gone on at Goldman over the past decade, that is very frightening to hear. So could this be the beginning of the end for Goldman Sachs? And if it is, will America be a better place when Goldman is gone?
You would think that at some point clients of Goldman would become so sick and tired of the stories of corruption coming out of the firm that they would simply walk away.
Unfortunately, corruption is so endemic on Wall Street that Goldman Sachs really does not seem out of place. The truth is that a lot of the things that are said about Goldman could also be said about JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley.
But in recent years Goldman Sachs has truly become a national symbol of what is wrong with our financial system. As the American people become fed up with institutions such as Goldman, hopefully we will start to see some of them disappear.
The following are 11 reasons why America would be a better place without Goldman Sachs….
#1 Even after all of the negative publicity we have seen in recent years, Goldman Sachs appears to not have learned any lessons. The following is how Greg Smith described the three ways to get ahead at Goldman Sachs….
"What are three quick ways to become a leader? a) Execute on the firm’s “axes,” which is Goldman-speak for persuading your clients to invest in the stocks or other products that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit. b) “Hunt Elephants.” In English: get your clients — some of whom are sophisticated, and some of whom aren’t — to trade whatever will bring the biggest profit to Goldman. Call me old-fashioned, but I don’t like selling my clients a product that is wrong for them. c) Find yourself sitting in a seat where your job is to trade any illiquid, opaque product with a three-letter acronym."
#2 Goldman Sachs is one of the too big to fail banks and those banks just keeping getting bigger than ever. Back in 2002, the top 10 U.S. banks controlled 55 percent of all U.S. banking assets. Today, the top 10 U.S. banks control 77 percent of all U.S. banking assets. So if we couldn't afford to let them fail back in 2008 because they were so big, why did we allow them to become even larger?
#3 The Federal Reserve shows great favoritism to big Wall Street banks such as Goldman Sachs. For example, between December 1, 2007 and July 21, 2010 the Federal Reserve made 814 billion dollars in secret loans to Goldman Sachs.
#4 Goldman Sachs is at the heart of the derivatives bubble that threatens to throw the entire global financial system into chaos. At this point, Goldman Sachs has over 53 trillion dollars of exposure to derivatives.
According to the New York Times, the big Wall Street banks completely control derivatives trading. In fact, the New York Times says that representatives from JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Citigroup hold a secretive meeting each month to coordinate their domination over the derivatives market….
On the third Wednesday of every month, the nine members of an elite Wall Street society gather in Midtown Manhattan.
The men share a common goal: to protect the interests of big banks in the vast market for derivatives, one of the most profitable — and controversial — fields in finance. They also share a common secret: The details of their meetings, even their identities, have been strictly confidential.
#5 Goldman Sachs was at the very heart of the financial crisis of 2008 which plunged the entire global economy into a very deep recession. In the years leading up to the financial crisis of 2008, Goldman Sachs was putting together mortgage-backed securities that they knew were garbage and they marketed them to investors as AAA-rated investments. On top of that, Goldman then often made huge bets against those exact same securities which turned out to be extremely profitable when those securities crashed and burned.
The following is how the New York Times described what was going on at the time….
"Goldman was not the only firm that peddled these complex securities — known as synthetic collateralized debt obligations, or C.D.O.’s — and then made financial bets against them, called selling short in Wall Street parlance. Others that created similar securities and then bet they would fail, according to Wall Street traders, include Deutsche Bank and Morgan Stanley, as well as smaller firms like Tricadia Inc."
Sylvain Raynes, an expert in structured finance at R & R Consulting in New York, said at the time that he was absolutely shocked by what Goldman was doing….
"The simultaneous selling of securities to customers and shorting them because they believed they were going to default is the most cynical use of credit information that I have ever seen"
#6 Goldman Sachs played a huge role in getting Greece, Italy and several other European nations into so much debt. The following is an excerpt from an article by Andrew Gavin Marshall….
In the same way that homeowners take out a second mortgage to pay off their credit card debt, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase and other U.S. banks helped push government debt far into the future through the derivatives market. This was done in Greece, Italy, and likely several other euro-zone countries as well. In several dozen deals in Europe, “banks provided cash upfront in return for government payments in the future, with those liabilities then left off the books.” Because the deals are not listed as loans, they are not listed as debt (liabilities), and so the true debt of Greece and other euro-zone countries was and likely to a large degree remains hidden. Greece effectively mortgaged its airports and highways to the major banks in order to get cash up-front and keep the loans off the books, classifying them as transactions.
#7 Goldman Sachs is working very hard to help state and local governments sell off our highways, water treatment plants, libraries, parking meters, airports and power plants to the highest bidder. Much of the time foreigners are the highest bidders for these precious infrastructure assets.
The following is how Dylan Ratigan described what is going on….
On Wall Street, setting up and running “Infrastructure Funds” is big business, with over $140 billion run by such banks as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Australian infrastructure specialist Macquarie. Goldman’s 2010 SEC filing should give you some sense of the scope of the campaign. Goldman says it will be involved with “ownership and operation of public services, such as airports, toll roads and shipping ports, as well as power generation facilities, physical commodities and other commodities infrastructure components, both within and outside the United States.” While the bank sees increased opportunity in “distressed assets” (ie. Cities and states gone broke because of the financial crisis), the bank also recognizes “reputational concerns with the manner in which these assets are being operated or held.”
#8 At the same time that Goldman Sachs is causing all sorts of trouble for everyone else, their employees are making crazy amounts of money. During 2010, employees of Goldman Sachs brought in more than 15 billion dollars in total compensation.
#9 Goldman Sachs has way too much influence over the federal government. There is a reason why it is commonly referred to as "Government Sachs". No matter who is the White House, people that used to work for Goldman and other big Wall Street banks always seem to be crawling around.
Last year, Michael Brenner wrote the following about the composition of the Obama administration….
Wall Street's takeover of the Obama administration is now complete. The mega-banks and their corporate allies control every economic policy position of consequence. Mr. Obama has moved rapidly since the November debacle to install business people where it counts most. Mr.William Daley from JP Morgan Chase as White House Chief of Staff. Mr. Gene Sperling from the Goldman Sachs payroll to be director of the National Economic Council. Eileen Rominger from Goldman Sachs named director of the SEC's Investment Management division. Even the National Security Advisor, Thomas Donilon, was executive vice president for law and policy at the disgraced Fannie Mae after serving as a corporate lobbyist with O'Melveny & Roberts. The keystone of the business friendly team was put in place on Friday. General Electric Chairman and CEO Jeffrey Immelt will serve as chair of the president's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.
#10 Employees from Goldman Sachs pour way too much money into our national elections. In 2008, donations from individuals and organizations affiliated with Goldman Sachs donated more than a million dollars to Barack Obama. This time around they are pouring huge amounts of cash into Mitt Romney's campaign.
#11 Goldman Sachs is still a "vampire squid" as Matt Taibbi once so famously proclaimed in Rolling Stone….
"The first thing you need to know about Goldman Sachs is that it's everywhere. The world's most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money. In fact, the history of the recent financial crisis, which doubles as a history of the rapid decline and fall of the suddenly swindled dry American empire, reads like a Who's Who of Goldman Sachs graduates."
Once again, there is nothing wrong with making money.
And there is certainly nothing wrong with working in the financial system.
But there is a right way to do things and there is a wrong way to do things.
Goldman Sachs is doing things very much the wrong way, and America would be a better place without them.
Remember this statement! The day will come when American’s will wonder why they did not demand a covert strike on the Investment Bankers, for if any human being deserves to die at the hand of justice it is these scumbags In the International Investment Banking Cartel. They are directly responsible for more atrocities than anyone who has lived in the history of civilization. Roasting them in public is not enough pain to compensate for what they have done. Hitler, and Stalin were saints in comparison to them.
March 15th, 2012 by olddog
Also read Bank of America Too Crooked to Fail at http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com
In a story that should be getting lots of attention, American Banker has released an excellent and disturbing exposé of J.P. Morgan Chase's credit card services division, relying on multiple current and former Chase employees. One of them, Linda Almonte, is a whistleblower whom I've known since last September; I'm working on a recount of her story for my next book.
One of the things we were promised by the lawmakers who passed the Dodd-Frank reform bill a few years back is that this would be a new era for whistleblowers who come forward to tell the world about problems in our financial infrastructure. This story now looms as a test case for that proposition. American Banker reporter Jeff Horwitz did an outstanding job in this story detailing the sweeping irregularities in-house at Chase, but his very thoroughness means the news may have ramifications for Linda, which is why I'm urging people to pay attention to this story in the upcoming weeks.
The Cliff's Notes version of the story goes something like this: Late in 2009, Chase's credit card services division sold a parcel of nearly $200 million worth of credit card judgments to a debt collector at a discount. This common practice in the credit-card industry is a little like a bookie selling the outstanding debts of his delinquent gamblers to a leg-breaker for 25 cents on the dollar. If the leg-breaker gets half the delinquents to pay, the deal works out for both sides — the bookie gets 25 percent of money he wasn't going to collect, and the leg-breaker makes a 100 percent profit.
In the case of credit cards, of course, you're selling the debts to collection agents, not leg-breakers, but aside from that unpleasantly minor distinction the process is the same. The most valuable kinds of sales in this world are sales of credit card judgments, in other words accounts in which the debtor has already been successfully brought to court. That, ostensibly, is what this bloc of accounts Chase sold in 2009 involved.
Almonte came to Chase in the summer of 2009 as a mid-level executive in the credit card services division's offices in San Antonio, and was quickly put in charge of preparing the documentation for this enormous sale of credit card judgments. When Chase regional offices from places like southern California and Illinois began sending in the papers for these "judgments," Almonte very soon found out that something was seriously wrong. From Horwitz's piece:
Nearly half of the files [Linda’s] team sampled were missing proofs of judgment or other essential information, she wrote to colleagues. Even more worrisome, she alleged in her wrongful-termination suit, nearly a quarter of the files misstated how much the borrower owed.
In the "vast majority" of those instances, the actual debt was "lower that what Chase was representing," her suit stated.
Linda subsequently found an enormous range of errors. Some judgments, she told me, were not judgments at all. In some cases, she said, Chase actually owed the customer money.
When she brought these concerns to her superiors, what do you think their response was? They told her and others to shut up and just sell the stuff anyway. Her boss, Jason Lazinbat, allegedly told her "she had better go along with the plan to sell the misrepresented asset."
Think of the consequences of this: because Chase was so anxious to make money off this debt sale, countless credit card borrowers would now have collection agents chasing them for money they did not owe. The debt-buyer, too, was victimized by being sold accounts it could not collect on. It is almost impossible to estimate how many man-hours of pointless court proceedings would be lost because of this decision.
Anyway, when Linda refused to go along with the sale, she was fired. This was in November of 2009. She then went through a post-firing odyssey that is an epic tale in itself: her many attempts to get any of the major bank regulators interested in this case were disturbingly fruitless for a long time (although the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is apparently looking into it now), and she struggled to find work in the industry.
She has been repeatedly harassed and has gone through all sorts of personal hardship as a result of this incident. She filed a whistleblower claim with the SEC as part of the new whistleblower program created by Dodd-Frank, but so far there's been no progress there.
When I met Linda last year, my first reaction to her story was that I was skeptical. The tale she told went far beyond the bank knowingly selling millions of dollars worth of errors into the financial system. She also recounted, firsthand, the bank's elaborate robosigning operation, which Horvitz, talking to other Chase employees, also discussed:
"We did not verify a single one" of the affidavits attesting to the amounts Chase was seeking to collect, says Howard Hardin, who oversaw a team handling tens of thousands of Chase debt files in San Antonio. "We were told [by superiors] 'We're in a hurry. Go ahead and sign them.'"
And there were other stories…suffice to say that the picture Linda painted of life inside Chase reminded me a little of Upton Sinclair's The Jungle: they were putting just about everything into those sausages. When I was writing it all up for my book I went through a period where I was waking up nights, seized with the urge to close every credit account I had – her story makes you think that most credit card companies are essentially indistinguishable from giant identity theft operations.
Again, though, when I first heard the story, I was skeptical – until I found other people in the company who verified Almonte's account, all the way down the line. Horvitz, too, found numerous employees in Chase's credit card services division who confirmed the story of the company knowingly selling a mountain of errors into the market, and manufacturing robo-signed documents to the tune of thousands per week.
The financial crash wouldn't have happened if even a slim plurality of financial executives had done what Linda Almonte did, i.e. simply refuse to sign off on a bogus transaction. If companies had merely upheld their own stated policies and stayed within the ballpark of the law, none of these messes could have accumulated: fraudulent mortgages wouldn't have been sold, families wouldn't have been foreclosed upon based on robo-signed documentation, investors wouldn't have been duped into buying huge packets of "misrepresented assets."
But most executives didn't refuse to go along, precisely because powerful companies make it so hard on people who come forward. Almonte, after being fired, entered into a modest settlement with Chase that prohibited her from coming forward publicly. At the time she entered into the settlement she was in an extremely desperate state, and she made a bad decision, taking a very bad deal.
Still, like Jeffery Wygand, the tobacco scientist from the movie The Insider, she was sitting on top of a story that, morally speaking, should not ever be protected by a confidentiality agreement — and the subsequent lack of regulatory action eventually moved her to speak out to people like Horvitz and me. Of course, now that her story is out there in public, the concern is that the bank will move swiftly to take her to court.
This person does not have any money, so an action by Chase at this point would be purely punitive, to send a message to future whistleblowers. They'll be more likely to do it if they think no one is paying attention. I'll keep you posted on that score.
In the meantime, please check out Horvitz's piece. It should give everyone who has a credit card pause. See it below.
OCC Probing JPMorgan Chase Credit Card Collections
First in a series
JPMorgan Chase & Co. took procedural shortcuts and used faulty account records in suing tens of thousands of delinquent credit card borrowers for at least two years, current and former employees say.
The process flaws sparked a regulatory probe by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and forced the bank to stop suing delinquent borrowers altogether last year.
The bank's errors could call into question the legitimacy of billions of dollars in outstanding claims against debtors and of legal judgments Chase has already won, current and former Chase employees say.
For the banking industry at large, the situation at Chase highlights the risk that shoddy back-office procedures and flawed legal work extends well beyond mortgage servicing.
"We did not verify a single one" of the affidavits attesting to the amounts Chase was seeking to collect, says Howard Hardin, who oversaw a team handling tens of thousands of Chase debt files in San Antonio. "We were told [by superiors] 'We're in a hurry. Go ahead and sign them.'"
Hardin left the bank in 2010 to work in a different industry.
Chase declined repeated requests to discuss details of its consumer debt collection activities.
Company documents, court filings, and interviews with seven current and former employees reveal that Chase's credit card litigation operation was allegedly plagued by unreliable external attorneys, management's disregard for accuracy, and patchy technology.
The bank's computer systems frequently disagreed about how much debtors actually owed, several of the Chase sources say.
The employees' stories corroborate allegations made by Linda Almonte, a former mid-level business process executive in Chase's San Antonio-based Credit Card Litigation Support Group. Dismissed in November 2009 after six months on the job, Almonte filed whistleblower complaints and a wrongful termination suit claiming that she was fired for objecting to the sale of credit card debts with erroneous balances.
Almonte's complaints drew the attention of the OCC, former Chase employees say, and led to the April 2011 shutdown of a formidable collections operation that generated several billion dollars of legal judgments every year.
Few details of the OCC's investigation are available, but current and former Chase employees confirm that staffers from the agency's enforcement division spent two months gathering information in the San Antonio facility late last year. A person familiar with the OCC's review says that the regulator is taking the situation very seriously.
This is the first article in a series that will look at what allegedly went wrong in Chase's credit card litigation operation — and how those missteps could roil the banking and debt collection industries.
The root of Chase's card collections failures was more machine than man. Chase maintains a patchwork of computer systems that don't always communicate well, according to former employees who used them. Meet TSYS, TCSF and RMS.
TSYS is what outsiders assume a global bank's customer data system looks like. Licensed from Total Systems Services Inc. and managed by Chase, it's the modern and versatile system that consumers ultimately talk to when they check their credit card balance online.
TSYS only handles current accounts, however. When customers stop paying credit card bills, their accounts are passed to TCSF, for collections and litigation, and eventually to RMS for charge-offs.
Each of Chase's systems handles its own tasks just fine. The problem employees faced is that TCSF and RMS can only talk to each other through TSYS, and each of the systems operates by its own rules. This means that when presented with the question of how much a customer owes, each might spit out a different answer.
"I came across that on a regular basis," says Carole McGinn, who retired in 2010 from the credit card litigation support group in San Antonio. The discrepancies were usually minor, she and three other employees say, but payments by heavily delinquent borrowers would throw the records seriously out of whack.
"There was no way to reconcile those balances that I knew of," says McGinn, who worked at Chase for almost 15 years.
To overcome this problem, Chase's business process staff reviewed records in multiple systems and reconciled the accounts manually.
Chase's relationship with outside debt collectors posed another potential glitch. In populous states like California, Illinois and Florida, the bank employed in-house attorneys who were wired into all of its relevant computer systems.
Elsewhere, it relied on what credit card litigation staffers referred to as "outhouse attorneys." Paid according to how much money they recovered, the outsiders were connected only to TCSF, the litigation system. Former Chase employees say some of the firms, such as thesince-imploded Mann Bracken LLP, were known for poor recordkeeping.
Chase's San Antonio crew was well versed in dealing with their computer systems' quirks and the outside firms' foibles. They adjusted accordingly, monitoring outside law firms for errors and stripping inaccurate charges from accounts.
"We made it work," says a former employee.
"Everything in Dollars Collected"
Things began to change in 2008, when Chase replaced the credit card division's San Antonio management, current and former Chase employees say. The bank installed Edmond Helaire as the San Antonio operations director, and he hired Jason Lazinbat as his No. 2.
Chase staffers who spoke with American Banker say they were never told the reason for the house-cleaning, but several speculate that the bank was looking to increase recoveries. Even before the financial crisis made a shambles of consumers' finances, Chase's expanding credit card portfolio and growing propensity to sue for unpaid debts had dramatically increased the volume of cases it handled.
At the beginning of the last decade, Chase recouped $130 million a year from bad consumer debt of all stripes. By 2009, recoveries on credit cards alone exceeded $1.2 billion. Over the next two years, the bank would charge off more than $20 billion in credit card accounts. Litigation was the most profitable way to handle the bad debts.
Lazinbat was a Chase veteran with experience overseeing teams of debt collectors. He chafed at what he saw as the duplicative checks and balances that the old guard considered essential to ensuring the numbers were accurate, former employees say.
Lazinbat "measured everything in terms of number of dollars collected," says a former Chase employee who requested anonymity. "He did not understand that in the process world, that's not what you look at. That's not the metric."
Chase spokesman Paul Hartwick responded to messages left for Lazinbat, who declined to comment.
Rank-and-file staff began complaining about orders to take shortcuts as part of the broader culture clash, current and former employees say. The conflict ended when Lazinbat and Helaire terminated several key mid-level officials in 2008 and early 2009, employees say.
"Documents Were Trashed"
One of the replacements brought in was Linda Almonte, a congenitally upbeat former Washington Mutual process execution manager who gets excited about Six Sigma quality control.
By the time of Almonte's May 2009 arrival, the rapidly expanding portfolio of delinquent accounts and the quirks in Chase's systems had produced serious problems, she and others say.
The outside attorneys were one flashpoint. The records the law firms used to sue people sometimes differed from Chase's own files at an alarming rate, according to a routine Chase presentation prepared by Almonte and later submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Some law firms' records disagreed with Chase's in almost 20% of cases sampled, a rate far above what is regarded as an acceptable level of errors.
"That's horrendous," says a former Chase attorney who was informed of the numbers by American Banker.
The outsiders' lack of access to TSYS was one weakness. Another was that the law firms' recovery-based pay encouraged slapdash work, says the former attorney and other former Chase employees.
"They did not make a meaningful review of what they had," the attorney says.
The staff of the Credit Card Litigation Support Group grappled with quality control and how to ascertain that customers did, in fact, owe the company money. In one Chase email, Almonte suggested to Lazinbat that the bank should negotiate with delinquent customers before suing them. Doing so, she wrote, would "weed out additional accounts that were settled or payments made that are not showing up in the system."
Other things were falling through the cracks. Borrower correspondence sent to the San Antonio facility, such as bankruptcy notifications, address changes, and hardship requests were being dropped on an unmanned desk, according to a 2009 printout from Chase's troubleshooting log.
"There is no existing … process in place that states what action should take place when … this correspondence is received," notes a log entry submitted by an employee.
(The emails and internal records cited in this story are pulled from Almonte's whistleblower complaints. While Chase has declined to discuss them, former employees attested to the documentation's apparent legitimacy.)
Documents weren't simply misplaced: Chase shredded incoming correspondence such as records of borrower payments and counter-judgments extinguishing debts, Almonte alleged in her wrongful termination suit.
While none of the people who spoke with American Bankerwitnessed this, McGinn says she also heard colleagues acknowledge that some correspondence had been destroyed.
"I understand there were documents trashed, yes," she says. McGinn retired from the San Antonio facility in June of 2010 after she says she became uneasy with how it was being managed.
"My mouth was going to get me in more trouble than I could live with," McGinn says.
Three Signers, Billions in Debt
Former Chase employees say they used to consider the mass production of affidavits by document signers to be at most a technical concern. This is because quality control staff traditionally vetted the files thoroughly for bankruptcies, identity theft, and errors before passing the documents to signers.
But given their growing concerns about possible errors in underlying collections and litigation records, these procedural issues began to seem substantive.
One of Chase's most prolific affidavit signers was Ruben Alcaraz, one of three San Antonio liaisons with the in-house collections attorneys, court filings indicate. By law, collection affidavits require the signer to be familiar with the bank's pertinent records.
(The failure to follow similar procedures in the mortgage market is what created the industry's foreclosure robosigning problems.)
"Based upon my review of the Plaintiff's books and records of Defendant's account(s), I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in the attached pleading," states one Pennsylvania card-debt affidavit signed by Alcaraz. "This verification is made subject to the penalties of [Pennsylvania law] relating to unsworn falsification to authorities."
Numerous former employees say that Alcaraz and his colleagues rarely if ever reviewed such files. They routinely signed stacks of affidavits on flights and in meetings, which in some cases were attended by Helaire, Lazinbat and Chase compliance staffers. Nobody objected, Almonte and others say.
Alcaraz also describes himself in the court documents as an "officer of the bank" and an "Assistant Treasurer." High-level Chase management had instructed the staff to stop signing documents using such titles around the middle of the last decade, four Chase sources say. But Lazinbat ordered them to do it anyway. An operator for Chase's internal switchboard identified Alcaraz as a "business analyst."
"Hardly, if ever, was anything verified," Almonte's SEC complaint states. "There was constant complaining by the Attorney Liaisons about having to manually sign these affidavits … they always questioned why they could not have them digitally signed in bulk."
"Each and every one of those [affidavits] should have been manually checked," says Hardin, framing the issue as one of basic quality control. "There was a lot of need for diligence, and sometimes that just didn't happen."
A message left for Alcaraz was returned by Chase spokesman Hartwick, who said that Alcaraz declined to comment.
"A Huge Cleanup"
Almonte says she initially limited her criticism of Chase's operations to pushing internally for improvements.
"I have a lot of areas where the ball was dropped … and now we have a huge cleanup," she wrote in an email to Lazinbat in October 2009.
While Almonte says her relationship with Helaire and Lazinbat was initially excellent, it fell apart when she began questioning how the bank was handling the sale of $200 million of legal judgments to an outside debt collection company.
Nearly half of the files her team sampled were missing proofs of judgment or other essential information, she wrote to colleagues. Even more worrisome, she alleged in her wrongful-termination suit, nearly a quarter of the files misstated how much the borrower owed.
In the "vast majority" of those instances, the actual debt was "lower that what Chase was representing," her suit stated.
Among the files Chase was selling, Almonte said, were former Providian Financial Corp debts that had previously belonged to the failed Washington Mutual. (JPMorgan acquired Wamu's assets from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. in 2008.) The Providian files had been labeled with a code that that the credit card litigation group used to signal "toxic waste," she says.
Another person familiar with the files confirmed that the Providian accounts were commonly referred to with that term. The debt had long been considered unreliable and lacked documentation. It was never supposed to be sold, this person says.
A review of state court records shows that second-hand debt buyers are suing people who allegedly owe money on the Chase-Wamu-Providian accounts, however. Informed that the files have surfaced in court, the former Chase employee who confirmed the files' "toxic" status was appalled.
"That's crazy," the person says. "I can't believe they [Chase officials] did that."
Almonte called for the bank to halt the debt sale, but was warned by Lazinbat that "she had better go along with the plan to sell the misrepresented asset," she later wrote in her employment lawsuit.
Almonte says she refused Lazinbat's order and escalated her concerns to his boss, Helaire. Chase fired her on Nov. 30, 2009.
Carole McGinn was not a party to discussions about the debt sale but confirms the thrust of Almonte's claims. "I know she [Almonte] was looking into things that they didn't want her looking into," McGinn says.
The following March, Almonte filed her wrongful termination suit. First reported by the San Antonio Express-News, the case brought Chase's alleged problems into public view.
"This is not an accident anymore," Almonte now says. "The same people who created this problem at Chase are still in charge. They aren't going to fix it unless they're forced to."
NEXT: Almonte sues. The OCC gets interested. Chase fires in-house collections attorneys and the reliability of its judgments comes into question.
DON'T BE A FOOL, USE YOUR LOCAL CREDIT UNION
March 12th, 2012 by olddog
by David L. Goetsch
By promoting an entitlement mentality, liberals in Congress and the White House are sowing the seeds of America’s destruction. Because of an ever-growing list of social programs, subsidies, and entitlements, more than half of all Americans now look to the government for at least a portion of their sustenance. As a result, many American’s have come to view government as the solution to their problems rather than the cause of them. The principles of limited government that undergirded Ronald Reagan’s Republican Revolution are being steadily undermined by the seductive allure of government handouts. This dangerously misguided trend promotes an entitlement mentality in a country that has long been known for its positive work ethic. The entitlement mentality, in turn, encourages the growth of government and the cycle continues, creating a downward spiral toward disaster.
America became an economic superpower not by accident, chance, or luck but because it was established with a free-market economy and people who thrived in an environment of economic freedom. These two pillars of America’s economic success—a free-market economy and economic freedom—hold the key for reversing America’s descent into insolvency. The only contributions to an economic recovery needed from government are: 1) get out of the way, 2) get out of the pockets of Americans, and 3) stop over-regulating businesses and the lives of American citizens. Sharp reductions in spending, taxation, and regulation will do for America’s economy what the government can never do: unleash the power of the free market, encourage entrepreneurship, and reinvigorate America’s work ethic.
After decades of prosperity, America’s economy is being undermined by a rapidly mutating government that devours initiative, drive, innovation, and the capital needed to seed an economic recovery. Too many Americans have bought into the increasingly discredited philosophy of the left that the government is the answer to all problems. No one exemplifies this misguided philosophy more than Maxine Waters, the Democrat Congresswoman from California. During the height of the budget reduction debate in August and September 2011, Waters indulged in a flight of fantasy and proposed increasing government spending rather than cutting it.
What is ironic about the tax-and-spend philosophy of the left as exemplified by Maxine Waters and President Obama is that not only do they fail to understand economics they don’t even know their own history. The worst tax-and-spend Democrat before Barack Obama was Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ). But even LBJ knew that cutting taxes was the best way to stimulate a weak economy. In his book, American Business, 1920-2000: How it Worked, Thomas McGraw wrote this about LBJ: “Johnson continued Kennedy’s efforts to use aggressive tax policies to stimulate the economy. The Revenue Act of 1964 cut taxes by $11.6 billion–$9.2 billion for individuals and $2.4 billion for corporations. In anticipation of more money flowing into the economy, businesses increased their inventory levels. As personal incomes swelled, consumer spending increased, and by 1965, the U.S. gross national product had expanded by over 25 percent …During the same period, industrial production increased by 27 percent, and corporate profits grew by 64 percent. The prosperity resulted in the unemployment rate’s dipping below 4 percent in 1966—a rate not seen since 1953.”
In spite of evidence like this that is readily available from the history of their own party, President Obama, Maxine Waters, and their fellow liberals continue to view the solution to America’s economic problems as spend, spend, and spend some more. In spite of the demonstrated failure of the hugely expensive stimulus bills, Obama, Waters, and their colleagues on the left still propose that Congress stop shooting the American economy in the foot and start shooting it in the head. All that this kind of thinking has brought America is an entitlement mentality that will make it increasingly difficult to do what is necessary to bring about an economic recovery.
March 7th, 2012 by olddog
FACT: the US Govt does not give a flying flip about nuclear weapons in Iran. How do I know this? Because under President Eisenhower's "Atoms for Peace" program, the US Govt allowed ALL NUCLEAR SECRETS to be shared by all nations via the universities. And, many Iranians worked at the world famous South Carolina nuclear hydrogen bomb making facility called Savannah River Site…the Iranians know our entire facility and its processes, because we gave them the knowledge.
So…get over the disinformation on the news. The banksters are planning to take down the independent Iranian banking system, because they intend to be global conquerors ….and the sovereign city-state called "Washington, DC" is the military wing of that endeavor….YOU ARE INCLUDED AS ONE OF THE BAD GUYS IN THIS ONE ….now, go think about yourself for awhile.
R.E. Sutherland, M.Ed./sciences
Freelance Investigative Science Reporter
Rothschilds Want Iran’s Banks
By Pete Papaherakles
Could gaining control of the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran (CBI) be one of the main reasons that Iran is being targeted by Western and Israeli powers? As tensions are building up for an unthinkable war with Iran, it is worth exploring Iran’s banking system compared to its U.S., British and Israeli counterparts.
Some researchers are pointing out that Iran is one of only three countries left in the world whose central bank is not under Rothschild control. Before 9-11 there were reportedly seven: Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea and Iran. By 2003, however, Afghanistan and Iraq were swallowed up by the Rothschild octopus, and by 2011 Sudan and Libya were also gone. In Libya, a Rothschild bank was established in Benghazi while the country was still at war.
Islam forbids the charging of interest, a major problem for the Rothschild banking system. Until a few hundred years ago, charging interest was also forbidden in the Christian world and was even punishable by death. It was considered exploitation and enslavement.
Since the Rothschilds took over the Bank of England around 1815, they have been expanding their banking control over all the countries of the world. Their method has been to get a country’s corrupt politicians to accept massive loans, which they can never repay, and thus go into debt to the Rothschild banking powers. If a leader refuses to accept the loan, he is oftentimes either ousted or assassinated. And if that fails, invasions can follow, and a Rothschild usury-based bank is established.
The Rothschilds exert powerful influence over the world’s major news agencies. By repetition, the masses are duped into believing horror stories about evil villains.
The Rothschilds control the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, the IMF, the World Bank and the Bank of International Settlements.
Also they own most of the gold in the world as well as the London Gold Exchange, which sets the price of gold every day. It is said the family owns over half the wealth of the planet—estimated by Credit Suisse to be $231 trillion—and is controlled by Evelyn Rothschild, the current head of the family.
Objective researchers contend that Iran is not being demonized because they are a nuclear threat, just as the Taliban, Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Muammar Qadaffi were not a threat.
What then is the real reason? Is it the trillions to be made in oil profits, or the trillions in war profits? Is it to bankrupt the U.S. economy, or is it to start World War III? Is it to destroy Israel’s enemies, or to destroy the Iranian central bank so that no one is left to defy Rothschild’s money racket?
It might be any one of those reasons or, worse—it might be all of them.
March 6th, 2012 by olddog
By Dr. Mercola
Above, ABC's "Nightline," Bill Weir talks with Microsoft founder Bill Gates about his charitable endeavors.
Gates' latest plan is to try to end world hunger by growing more genetically modified (GM) crops.
He's already invested $27 million into Monsanto Company—leading some countries to reject his charity due to the high risks, such as:
· New disease vectors
· Mutated pesticide-resistant insects
· Resistant "superweeds"
· Contamination of surrounding non-GM crops
We already know how deeply entrenched the U.S. government has become with Monsanto.
For a visual illustration of their 'revolving-door-relationship' with the governmental regulatory agencies, see the graph toward the bottom of this article.
It is this type of government infiltration that allowed genetically engineered alfalfa to be approvedwithout any restrictions at all, despite the protests of the organic community and public comments from a quarter of a million concerned citizens.
In Bill Gates, Monsanto also has one of the wealthiest and most influential "philanthropists" supporting their agenda and spreading misleading propaganda about their products.
In recent years, it has become disappointingly clear that Gates may be leading the pack as one of the most destructive "do-gooders" on the planet… His views on what is required to make a difference in poverty- and disease-stricken third world nations are short-sighted and misinformed at best. A recent article in the Seattle Times1 joins me in arguing that Bill Gates' support of genetically modified (GM) crops as a solution for world hunger is based on unsound science. A team of 900 scientists funded by the World Bank and United Nations, investigated the matter over the course of three years, and determined that the use of GM crops is simply NOT a meaningful solution to the complex situation of world hunger.
Instead, the scientists suggested that "agro-ecological" methods would provide the most viable means to ensure global food security, including the use of traditional seed varieties and local farming practices already adapted to the local ecology.
"Philanthropy is the Enemy of Justice"
In a recent article with the same headline, "Philanthropy is the Enemy of Justice", Robert Newman criticizes2 the choice of Bill Gates as the designated "voice" of the world's poor at the World Economic Forum, held in January.
"Am I saying that philanthropy has never done good? No, it has achieved many wonderful things… But beware the havoc that power without oversight and democratic control can wreak," Newman writes.
"The biotech agriculture that Lord Sainsbury was unable to push through democratically he can now implement unilaterally, through his Gatsby Foundation. We are told that Gatsby's biotech project aims to provide food security for the global south. But if you listen to southern groups such as the Karnataka State Farmers of India, food security is precisely the reason they campaign against GM, because biotech crops are monocrops which are more vulnerable to disease and so need lashings of petrochemical pesticides, insecticides and fungicides – none of them cheap – and whose ruinous costs will rise with the price of oil, bankrupting small family farms first. Crop diseases mutate, meanwhile, and all the chemical inputs in the world can't stop disease wiping out whole harvests of genetically engineered single strands.
Both the Gatsby and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundations are keen to get deeper into agriculture, especially in Africa. But top-down nostrums for the rural poor don't end well."
I agree. Donating patented seeds, which takes away the farmers' sovereignty, is not the way to save the third-world poor. As reported by Netline last year3, Monsanto and other biotech companies have collaborated with the Gates Foundation via the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) to promote the use of genetically modified (GM) crops in Africa. The Gates Foundation has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to AGRA, and in 2006 Robert Horsch was hired for the AGRA project. Horsch was a Monsanto executive for 25 years. In a nutshell, the project may be sold under the banner of altruism and 'sustainability', but in reality it's anything but. It's just a multi-billion dollar enterprise to transform Africa into a GM-crop-friendly continent.
Conflicts of Interest Abound
Gates' philanthropic methods came under scrutiny back in August 2010, when it was discovered that The Gates Foundation had purchased 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock; dramatically increasing its previous holdings—and hence its financial conflicts of interest—in the biotech firm. AGRA-Watch commented on the ties stating4:
"The Foundation's direct investment in Monsanto is problematic on two primary levels," said Dr. Phil Bereano, University of Washington Professor Emeritus and recognized expert on genetic engineering.
"First, Monsanto has a history of blatant disregard for the interests and well-being of small farmers around the world, as well as an appalling environmental track record. The strong connections to Monsanto cast serious doubt on the Foundation's heavy funding of agricultural development in Africa and purported goal of alleviating poverty and hunger among small-scale farmers. Second, this investment represents an enormous conflict of interests."
It would be naive to think that all these philanthropic collaborations are designed to solve any problem besides how to help Monsanto monopolize the world's food supply with expensive patented GM seeds, and the herbicides to go with them.
In the interview above, Gates claims the seeds would be donated to the impoverished areas in question. But seriously, how long would the seeds remain free? There's rarely such a thing as a free lunch anymore, and it appears highly unlikely that Monsanto is poised to "feed Africa" indefinitely… And since you cannot save Monsanto's seeds from year to year, they will literally own the areas and the people they temporarily donate their seeds to. And once you own the rights to all the food grown around the globe, youliterally rule the world.
That appears to be the goal. And only sane, rational, thinking people can stop them. It's really too bad that Gates has signed up as a lackey for "the Dark Side," as it were, instead of using his unfathomable wealth to really create positive, sustainable change.
It's an undisputed fact at this point that the introduction of genetically engineered crops lead to diminished biodiversity, which is the direct opposite of what the world needs. Truly, in order to save the planet and ourselves, small-scale organic and sustainable farming must not only prevail but flourish, and GM crops do not help, but rather threaten their existence. Seeds have always been sold and swapped freely between farmers, preserving biodiversity, and without that basis, you cannot have food sovereignty. And with fewer farmers, "feeding the hungry with GM crops" is nothing but a pipe dream.
Both Genetically Engineered Seeds and Herbicides Pose Risks to Environment and Human Health
Besides the threat to the environment and to agricultural practices, GM crops also bring a whole host of health concerns; not just from the GM seeds, but also from the herbicide used: Monsanto's Roundup. It's the world's best-selling herbicide, which is designed to be partnered with genetically engineered "Roundup Ready" crops.
According to a shocking report5, regulators were aware as early as 1980 that glyphosate, the active chemical ingredient of Roundup, caused birth defects in lab animals. However, the information was not made public. Instead, regulators misled the public about glyphosate's safety, and with the introduction of Roundup Ready crops, the use of Roundup has skyrocketed.
According to Monsanto. NO6:
"Dr. Andres Carrasco, a lead embryologist at the University of Bueno Aires Medical School and the Argentinean national research council, discovered that glyphosate-based herbicides like Monsanto's Roundup formula caused deformations in chicken embryos that resembled the kind of birth defects which where reported in areas like La Leonesa, where big agribusinesses depend on glyphosate to treat genetically engineered crops."
Golden Rice: a "Trojan Horse"
The idea that you can end world hunger with genetically engineered crops is simply not very well thought through. Last summer, I reported on The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's donation of $20 million toward the development of so-called "golden rice"—yet another untested GM crop that risks bringing economic and ecological disaster. Golden rice has been genetically engineered to produce beta-carotene, which your body can convert to vitamin A. It's been promoted as a way to alleviate vitamin A deficiency, which is common in developing countries where people don't have regular access to beta-carotene-rich foods, like vegetables and fruits.
However, while this sounds all well and good in theory, the reality of a beta-carotene producing rice may not be all it's cracked up to be. According to Food Freedom7:
"Golden rice is a Trojan horse for pushing through GE-friendly biosafety regulations under the guise of humanitarian aid. Once in place, these regulations open the door for the biotech industry to bring in commercial, patented GE crops; USAID and Monsanto accomplished exactly this in Kenya with their sweet potato project."
It may be easier to see why so many people question this kind of philanthropy once you understand a bit more about the product itself, and why it likely cannot ever live up to its own hype. In this case, your body can only convert beta-carotene to vitamin A under certain conditions. Specifically, beta-carotene is fat-soluble, which means dietary fat is required for your body to convert it into vitamin A. But many people in developing countries eat very low-fat diets, as they simply do not have access to animal foods or other fat on a regular basis. Furthermore, malnourished people might not be able to convert beta carotene to vitamin A efficiently, so taken as a whole, the actual usefulness of golden rice is debatable.
The soundness of the idea becomes even more questionable when you consider the unrealistic amounts of rice you'd have to consume each day to obtain the recommended amount of vitamin A. As stated in a golden rice case study from Iowa State University8:
"Even if golden rice is successfully introduced … a woman would need to eat 16 lbs. of cooked rice every day in order to get sufficient Vitamin A, if golden rice were her only source of the nutrient. A child would need 12 lbs." [Emphasis mine]
What people in the developing world need in order to receive ample dietary vitamin A is access to a diverse range of nutritious foods — including animal products like eggs, cheese and meat and vegetables such as dark leafy greens and sweet potatoes. This is the type of diet that is attained from biodiverse farming — the opposite of what will occur if GM crops like golden rice get planted on a large scale.
Learn More about Genetically Engineered Foods
Many Americans are still unfamiliar with what GE foods are, which is understandable when you consider that these foods do not need to be labeled in the U.S. We have a plan to change that, and I urge you to participate, and to continue learning more about genetically engineered foods and associated risks, and help your friends and family do the same.
To start, please print out and use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide, created by the Institute for Responsible Technology. Share it with your friends and family, and post it to your social networks. You can also download a free iPhone application, available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
An even better strategy is to simply buy USDA 100% Organic products whenever possible, (as these do not permit GM ingredients) or buy whole fresh produce and meat from local farmers. The majority of the GMO's (genetically modified organism) you're exposed to are via processed foods, so by cooking from scratch with whole foods, you can be sure you're not inadvertently consuming something laced with GM ingredients. When you do purchase processed food, avoid products containing anything related to corn or soy that are not 100 percent organic, as any foods containing these two non-organic ingredients are virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, as well as toxic herbicide residues.
To learn more about GM foods, I highly recommend number of great films and lectures available, including:
· Hidden Dangers in Kid's Meals
· Your Milk on Drugs – Just Say No!
· Everything You Have to Know About Dangerous Genetically Modified Foods
Does Monsanto "Own" the U.S. Government?
Is sure seems like it at times. Genetically engineered seeds are now banned in Hungary, as they are in several other European countries, such as Germany and Ireland. Peru is also following the precautionary principle, and has even passed a law that bans genetically modified ingredients within the nation for 10 years9.
In the U.S., however, the opposite to consumer protection is taking place, with certain states actually passing legislation that protects the use of GM seeds and allows for unabated expansion! To date, 14 states have passed such legislation and Michigan's Sen. Bill 777, if passed, would make that 15.
The Michigan bill would prevent anti-GMO laws and would remove "any authority local governments may have to adopt and enforce ordinances that prohibit or regulate the labeling, sale, storage, transportation, distribution, use, or planting of agricultural, vegetable, flower or forest tree seeds." Bills like these are obviously music to Monsanto's ears, which spends millions of dollars lobbying the U.S. government at the federal level for favorable legislation that supports the spread of their toxic products. In the first quarter of 2011 alone, Monsanto spent $1.4 million on lobbying the federal government — a drop from the year before, when they spent $2.5 million during the same quarter.
If we all had several million to spend on lobbying efforts, the world would undoubtedly be a very different place… If you aren't familiar with the power of lobbying please view the recent 60 minutes expansion on it, which is one of the best 60 Minute episodes I have seen in 40 years.
Not only that, but once you realize just how many of Monsanto's employees have simply shifted into positions of power within the federal government, it suddenly becomes easy to understand how this biotech giant has managed to so successfully undermine common sense within the U.S. government.
March 3rd, 2012 by olddog
No matter what you think, or what anyone say's, this man will bring all of the power of the BUSH Cartel right back to finish destroying the United States of America. If he manages to weasel his way to the nomination, pack up and get the hell out of America, because if he manages that, the dumb asses among us will be just as thrilled as the obama groupies were. The Bush family is the scum of the earth, with billions of our money in off-shore accounts, property in countries with no extradition, and the backing of the International Banking Cartel. WTF!
Bush has fanned the flames himself, possibly to whet his party’s appetite for a 2016 run. | AP Photo
By GLENN THRUSH and MAGGIE HABERMAN | 2/29/12 7:06 PM EST
Mitt Romney’s tortured triumph in Michigan put him back in the GOP driver’s seat — but that hasn’t quelled the desire among some Republicans to trade up.
Yes, Republicans are still pining for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush despite his repeated and vehement refusal to be sucked into the 2012 Republican vortex.
And Democrats continue to cast a wary eye on a guy they see as more dangerous — and capable of connecting with middle-class and Latino voters — than Romney.
The Bush murmurs persist, even as a resilient Romney marches toward Super Tuesday with a commanding lead in cash, delegates and momentum over a sagging Rick Santorum.
“I have the perfect candidate — Jeb Bush. But he’s not running,” former George W. Bush chief of staff Andy Card told Charlie Rose on CBS on Wednesday, echoing the sentiments of many in his party.
“What Democrat would not worry about a popular leader from a critical state who sounds pretty moderate and can rescue the GOP from its anti-Latino death grip?” asked former Bill Clinton press secretary Mike McCurry, who said he’s yet to find a Democratic elder who thinks the GOP is truly “unhinged” enough to consider ditching Romney for Bush.
Bush — who has refused to endorse Romney in 2012 as he did in 2008 and whose son endorsed Jon Huntsman — has fanned the flames himself, possibly to whet his party’s appetite for a 2016 run. After keeping a low profile during the hotly contested Florida primary in January, he popped up last week at the height of the Romney-Santorum duel in Michigan to declare his problems with the GOP presidential field.
“I used to be a conservative and I watch these debates and I’m wondering, I don’t think I’ve changed but it’s a little troubling sometimes when people are appealing to people’s fears and emotion rather than trying to get them to look over the horizon for a broader perspective,” Bush told a gathering in Dallas last Thursday, according to FOX News.
“I think that changes when we get to the general election — I hope,” added Bush, who has personally urged Romney to moderate his rhetoric on illegal immigration for fear of completely alienating Hispanic voters in states like Florida, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona.
That got the attention of conservatives including Ann Coulter, who slammed him of prepping for a campaign, and Obama campaign officials who found his timing curious.
Ana Navarro, a Republican strategist and a friend of Bush, said she saw the former governor last Sunday and he laughed off any idea that he’ll jump in the game.
But even Navarro couldn’t resist indulging in a little starry-eyed speculation of what might have been.
“Why is he a fearful figure? You know, anybody who knows Jeb Bush and who’s heard Jeb Bush understands there’s a certain inspirational quality to him,” she said in an interview.
“He is smart, he is scary smart, and he has got a national network of supporters that he could turn on with the flip of a switch. And nobody could hold Obama’s feet to the fire in the Latino community like Jeb Bush.”
That opinion has considerable bipartisan support. “Don’t buy the bulls—- about us not being worried about Jeb,” added a veteran Democratic operative. “He’s a tough matchup even if his last name is Bush.”
Bush has said repeatedly that he isn’t running and the people around him say he couldn’t pull it off at this late date even if he wanted to. (“If Jeb had any intention of competing for the Republican nomination, he would have been at it from day one,” Navarro said. “Jeb does not play games.”)
Karl Rove, another Bush fan, recently wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed declaring the possibility of a brokered convention — a scenario that could theoretically result in a Bush candidacy — comparable to finding life on Pluto, although he didn’t rule out a contested convention where delegates shift their votes.
But Bush has said no to anyone who asked whether he’s interested, including his son George P. Bush.
Operatives in both parties say he’d be crazy to jump in now instead of waiting four years, when his Democratic opponent won’t have the benefits of incumbency.
But if 2012 has proven anything, it’s that logic isn’t always the most important thing. Republican operatives, speaking to POLITICO on condition of anonymity, talk about Bush in the glowing tones of a potential spouse who got away — and seems perfect in comparison to the person they stare at across their coffee every morning.
Likewise, Democrats have been gaming out the possibility of an Obama-Bush face-off, just as they have with other no-thanks Republicans, including Chris Christie and Mitch Daniels.
One third-party Democratic group was so concerned about Bush that it recently paid for a poll to gauge his performance in a head-to-head matchup against Obama, according to a Democrat briefed on the poll.
The survey revealed nothing that public polling hasn’t already covered — that Obama enjoys a substantial lead and that the Bush surname is still toxic.
That it was undertaken at all shows the extent of the concern over a possible Bush candidacy and, more important, a lingering uncertainty — even a touch of anxiety — in Democratic circles about Romney’s ability to make it over the finish line.
The Obama campaign loves watching Mitt Romney squirm in the spotlight — but they don’t want to see him so irretrievably damaged that it draws better candidates into the fray.
And while many inside the Obama campaign are itching to see the race resolved — so they can target Romney exclusively and hone their fighting skills — the prevailing sentiment is that the GOP infighting is a gift from the political gods.
“On some level, I’d love to get this thing going,” said a senior party official, quickly adding, “I know that sounds crazy, but it would be nice to lock Romney in.”
Obama’s brain trust was rooting for a Santorum victory in Michigan and were disappointed that efforts by unions and local Democrats to coax party members into cross-registering to vote for Santorum fell short.
But they were pleased with the way the Michigan primary went down — Romney’s two-Cadillacs-and-just-right-trees speech to an empty football stadium, the embrace of the polarizing immigration crusader Gov. Jan Brewer in Arizona, the $4.2 million burn to win his home state.
And they have watched gleefully as Obama’s approval rating in the state has ballooned to 16 points in the latest Public Policy Polling survey — in part because of Romney’s opposition to the auto bailout.
“In 2008, the protracted primary allowed us to build our organization across the country and lay out an affirmative vision,” said Obama 2012 communications director Ben LaBolt.
“That’s not what the Republicans have done — they haven’t invested in organization and they’re leapfrogging to the right of each other on issues from Medicare to immigration,” he added. “Their primary has been an echo chamber where they have debated who is the most committed to tea party orthodoxy rather than laying out a plan to create jobs and restore economic security for the middle class, the issues most Americans are focused on.”
Romney, for his part, cast Tuesday’s 3-point win in Michigan as a narrow but important benchmark, another brick in the road to inevitability.
Despite a recent spate of good polls and encouraging economic data, Obama remains vulnerable, especially if Republicans get past their intraparty food fight to focus on the president’s inability to bring unemployment below 8 percent and a widely held belief that he pushed through health reform in lieu of working on the economy.
But Democrats, including those who sense Obama’s weakness, watched Romney’s speech Tuesday night with a sense of relief that Bush wasn’t the man at the podium.
“I think anybody who’s legitimate would make it a race with Obama at this point,” said a former adviser to Hillary Clinton in 2008. “If they did get someone who was reasonably grown-up now and — poof — we got a race. … And Jeb’s not just anybody, he’s got damned good skills, he can raise money and even people who hated his brother concede he’s the smartest Bush.”
March 2nd, 2012 by olddog
By Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)
One of the great honors of my service to Tennessee is having the opportunity to represent Ft. Campbell which is home to the storied 101st Airborne, the 5th Special Forces Group and the Army’s 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment which piloted Navy SEAL Team Six during the raid on Osama Bin Laden.
Each soldier who calls Ft. Campbell home has gone through some of the most intensive training on the planet which pushed their minds and bodies to their physical limits. In the end, those who make the cut have earned the right to be part of our United States military, are honored to wear its uniform, and are serving on the frontlines in the fight against global terrorism.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for our nation’s Transportation Security Officers (TSO’s) who Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano contends are our nation’s last line of defense in fighting domestic terrorism. Unlike “hell week” which faces potential Navy SEALs, becoming a TSO requires a basic level of classroom and on the job training. In many cases this rigorous training is less severe than the requirements of becoming a security guard in most states.
Believe it or not, only 7 years ago, TSO’s went by a more deserving title, “airport security screeners.” At the time, their title and on the job appearance consisted of a white shirt and black pants. This was fitting because airport security screening is exactly what’s required of the position. However, this is no longer the case.
In the dead of night, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) administratively reclassified airport security screeners as Transportation Security Officers. The TSA then moved to administratively upgrade TSO’s uniforms to resemble those of a federal law enforcement officer. They further completed the makeover with metal law enforcement badges. Not surprisingly, government bureaucrats at the TSA left out one crucial component during the artificial makeover – actual federal law enforcement training as is required of Federal Air Marshalls.
While TSO’s may have the appearance of a federal law enforcement officer they have neither the authority nor the power. If a passenger brings a loaded gun or an explosive device into an airport screening area there is nothing a TSO can do until the local police step in to save the day.
If TSO’s are truly our nation’s last line of defense in stopping an act of terrorism, then the TSA should immediately end the practice of placing hiring notices for available TSO positions on pizza boxes and at discount gas stations as theyhave done in our nation’s capital. Surely, this is not where our federal government is going to find our brightest and sharpest Americans committed to keeping our traveling public safe. I would contend that we can surely strive for a higher standard and may want to look first to our veterans returning home from the battlefield.
Interestingly enough, as TSA officials like to routinely point out, their agency’s acronym stands for Transportation Security Administration, not the Airport SecurityAdministration. This fact has extended the TSA’s reach has far beyond the confines of our nation’s airports. Many of my constituents discovered this first hand this past fall as those familiar blue uniforms and badges appeared on Tennessee highways. In October Tennessee became the first state to conduct a statewide Department of Homeland Security Visible Intermodal Prevention andResponse (VIPR) team operation which randomly inspected Tennessee truck drivers and cars.
VIPR teams which count TSO’s among their ranks, conduct searches and screenings at train stations, subways, ferry terminals and every other mass transit location around the country. In fact, as the Los Angeles Times has detailed, VIPR teams conducted 9,300 unannounced checkpoints and other search operations in the last year alone. The very thought of federal employees with zero law enforcement training roaming across our nation’s transportation infrastructure with the hope of randomly thwarting a domestic terrorist attack makes about as much sense as EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s Environmental Justice tour.
In order to help rein in the TSA I introduced H.R. 3608, the Stop TSA’s Reach in Policy Act aka the STRIP Act. This bill will simply overturn the TSA’s administrative decision by prohibiting any TSA employee who has not received federal law enforcement training from using the title “officer,” wearing a police like uniform or a metal police badge. At its most basic level the STRIP Act is about truth in advertising.
As TSO’s continue to expand their presence beyond our nation’s airports and onto our highways, every American citizen has the right to know that they are not dealing with actual federal law enforcement officers. Had one Virginia woman known this days before Thanksgiving she may have been able to escape being forcibly raped by a TSO who approached her in a parking lot in full uniform while flashing his badge.
Will the STRIP Act solve every problem facing the TSA? Absolutely not. The STRIP Act seeks to expand upon the work of my colleagues by chipping away at an unnoticed yet powerful overreach of our federal government. If Congress cannot swiftly overturn something as simple as this administrative decision there will be little hope that we can take steps to truly rein in the TSA on larger issues of concern.
Furthermore, if Congress fails to act do not be surprised if the TSA gives TSO’s another administrative makeover in the future. Only this time it won’t be a new uniform. It will be the power to make arrests as some TSO’s are already publicly calling for.
Congressman Blackburn is a Republican serving Tennessee’s 7th district.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. GRG [Ref.
March 1st, 2012 by olddog
After it was exposed that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the philanthropic brainchild of Microsoft founder Bill Gates, purchased 500,000 abundantly clear that this so-called benevolent charity is up to something other than eradicating disease and feeding the world’s poor. It turns out that the Gates family legacy has long been one of trying to dominate and control the world’s systems, including in the areas of technology, medicine, and now agriculture.
The Gates Foundation, aka the tax-exempt Gates Family Trust, is currently in the process of spending billions of dollars in the name of humanitarianism to establish a global food monopoly dominated by genetically-modified (GM) crops and seeds. And based on the Gates family’s history of involvement in world affairs, it appears that one of its main goals besides simply establishing corporate control of the world’s food supply is to reduce the world’s population by a significant amount in the process.
William H. Gates Sr., former head of eugenics group Planned Parenthood
Bill Gates’ father, William H. Gates Sr., has long been involved with the eugenics group Planned Parenthood, a rebranded organization birthed out of the American Eugenics Society. In a 2003 interview with PBS‘ Bill Moyers, Bill Gates admitted that his father used to be the head of Planned Parenthood, which was founded on the concept that most human beings are just “reckless breeders” and “human weeds” in need of culling (http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_gates.html).
Gates also admitted during the interview that his family’s involvement in reproductive issues throughout the years has been extensive, referencing his own prior adherence to the beliefs of eugenicist Thomas Robert Malthus, who believed that populations of the world need to be controlled through reproductive restrictions. Though Gates claims he now holds a different view, it appears as though his foundation’s initiatives are just a modified Malthusian approach that much more discreetly reduces populations through vaccines and GMOs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus).
Gates Foundation has invested heavily in converting Asian, African agricultural systems to GMOs
William Gates Sr.’s association with Planned Parenthood and continued influence in the realm of “population and reproductive health” is significant because Gates Sr. is co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/leadership/Pages/william-gates-sr.aspx). This long-time eugenicist “guides the vision and strategic direction” of the Gates Foundation, which is currently heavily focused on forcing GMOs on Africa via its financing of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA).
The Gates Foundation has admittedly given at least $264.5 million in grant commitments to AGRA (www.gatesfoundation.org/about/Documents/BMGFFactSheet.pdf), and also reportedly hired Dr. Robert Horsch, a former Monsanto executive for 25 years who developed Roundup, to head up AGRA back in 2006. According to a report published in La Via Campesina back in 2010, 70 percent of AGRA’s grantees in Kenya work directly with Monsanto, and nearly 80 percent of the Gates Foundation funding is devoted to biotechnology(http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_21606.cfm).
The same report explains that the Gates Foundation pledged $880 million in April 2010 to create the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), which is a heavy promoter of GMOs. GAFSP, of course, was responsible for providing $35 million in “aid” to earthquake-shattered Haiti to be used for implementing GMO agricultural systems and technologies.
Back in 2003, the Gates Foundation invested $25 million in “GM (genetically modified) research to develop vitamin and protein-enriched seeds for the world’s poor,” a move that many international charities and farmers groups vehemently opposed (http://healthfreedoms.org). And in 2008, the Gates Foundation awarded $26.8 million to Cornell University to research GM wheat, which is the next major food crop in the crosshairs of Monsanto‘s GM food crop pipeline (http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_21606.cfm).
If you control agriculture, you control the populations of the world
The Gates Foundation‘s ties with Monsanto and corporate agriculture in general speak volumes about its real agenda, which is to create a monopolistic system of world control in every area of human life. Vaccines, pharmaceuticals, GMOs, reproductive control, weather manipulation, global warming — these and many other points of entry are the means by which the Gates Foundation is making great strides to control the world by pretending to help improve and save it.
Rather than promote real food sovereignty and address the underlying political and economic issues that breed poverty, Gates and Co. has instead embraced the promotion of corporately owned and controlled agriculture and medicine paradigms that will only further enslave the world’s most impoverished. It is abundantly evident that GMOs have ravished already impoverished people groups by destroying their native agricultural systems, as has been seen in India (http://www.naturalnews.com/030913_Monsanto_suicides.html).
Some may say Gates’ endeavors are all about the money, while others may say they are about power and control. Perhaps it is a combination of both, where Gates is still in the business of promoting his own commercial investments, which includes buying shares in Monsanto while simultaneously investing in programs to promote Monsanto.
Whatever the case may be, there is simply no denying that Gates now has a direct interest in seeing Monsanto succeed in spreading GMOs around the world. And since Gates is openly facilitating Monsanto‘s growth into new markets through his “humanitarian” efforts, it is clear that the Gates family is in bed with Monsanto.
“Although Bill Gates might try to say that the Foundation is not linked to his business, all it proves is the opposite: most of their donations end up favoring the commercial investments of the tycoon, not really “donating” anything, but instead of paying taxes to state coffers, he invests his profits in where it is favorable to him economically, including propaganda from their supposed good intentions,” wrote Silvia Ribeiro in the Mexican news source La Jornada back in 2010.
“On the contrary, their ‘donations’ finance projects as destructive as geoengineering or replacement of natural community medicines for high-tech patented medicines in the poorest areas of the world … Gates is also engaged in trying to destroy rural farming worldwide, mainly through the ‘Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa’ (AGRA). It works as a Trojan horse to deprive poor African farmers of their traditional seeds, replacing them with the seeds of their companies first, finally by genetically modified (GM).”
February 29th, 2012 by olddog
By Paul Walter
February 29, 2012
[Note: This article appeared as a full page ad in the Grants Pass “Daily Courier” newspaper on Saturday, January 28, 2012]
WHY I LOVE AMERICA
I immigrated to the United States with my family when I was 15 years-old. I was in awe to find a country where you could be anything you wanted to be as long as you were honest, moral and hard-working. This wasn't possible in the communist country from which my parents and I had escaped. There, government control was from the cradle to the grave. They kept the people poor, and controlled, while the aristocrats and politicians (gov't.) were living high on the hog with big benefits and salaries. They policed our every move and restricted our God-given freedoms.
America was the light of the world and it gave hope to the oppressed.
Now, there are forces at work destroying our nation, and our individualism for the sake of the world's collectivism. I'm not just talking about Obama; he is a minute player in the grand scheme of this fast approaching New World Order. Our very culture is being threatened; our way of life; our liberties; and the legacy that we are leaving our children, and theirs, is one of indentured servitude to a government that has wildly swung from being representative by design to being dictatorial in practice.
For the past 20 years I have been accurately predicting and fighting against what is now right around the corner. Sadly, this year, 2012, could be the last for this great nation. However, I owe a lot to this country and I will stand by my beliefs and fight to save my beloved America.
Why am I so seemingly fanatic about trying to save our country? It's simple… I know better than to let it travel down the path of socialism to communism, and if you had lived under the yoke of communism as I did, you wouldn't want it either.
Our country is teetering on a precipice about to fall completely away from the limited government upon which this country was founded, to being that of a truly communist country.
1. Starvation of Biblical proportions through contrived food shortages.
2. Under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), anyone who bucks the New World Order mentality of the government can be considered an enemy combatant.
3. Check points on the freeways to check your papers. We have already seen the start of this with the TSA check points – not just at airports but on buses, trains, and highways as well.
4. Censorship of the news and internet.
5. “Smart” meters will be placed on every home to control your utility consumption – including meters on wells. They have already begun installing “Smart” meters under the guise of “efficiency.” There is already a lot of information concerning these machines – not to mention lawsuits. Read Devvy Kidd’s column, “Update: My fight against the ‘smart’ meter.”
6. The federal government will further control our foods, natural medicines and vitamins. They will dictate what we can and cannot eat, drink, smoke, say, and do. Several health-food store owners in California already face jail time for the “crime” of selling safe, healthy life-promoting, raw unpasteurized milk.
7. Public schools will be used to indoctrinate your children into global citizenship as well as being used in the future as centers to reeducate the masses.
8. Government will encourage the public to spy on and report their neighbors for any “suspicious” behavior.
9. Those who have prepared for hard times will legally be considered hoarders. Recent legislation establishes guidelines for law enforcement to be sent in to confiscate their food.
10. Class and race warfare will be pushed in order to gain further control over the population.
The socialists in government are counting on the loyalty of the police and military to enforce these draconian and unconstitutional edicts. Stalin got the loyalty of his police and army. Hitler got it, too. A good example is Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad's police are following his orders killing their own citizens to keep their dictator that signs their paycheck in power. A dictator can not be a dictator by himself, he has to have loyal followers. Will the “new” America get their support?
We hope these men and women who have sworn to protect us will see that by doing what is morally right, and standing with their fellow citizens, it will help ensure the future of our country.
HOW DID WE ARRIVE IN THIS MESS?
For most local and state elections there is only a 35-40% voter turnout. The majority of the public doesn't even bother to vote, taking freedom for granted. Good people become bad citizens when they don't vote.
Instead of doing research and selecting the best candidate most keep voting for who is the most charming, best looking and the smoothest talker, or who gets the most coverage by the biased mainstream media. We end up voting-in candidates who don’t know what it means to represent their constituents; instead they end up representing the special interests that paid for their media coverage!
As we all saw on the news recently, 100k Russian people stood out in sub-zero weather demanding honest elections. Here in America, where people are free, people tolerate injustice and keep repeatedly voting-in the same scoundrels.
Be it Republican or Democrat at the highest levels, it makes little difference because they no longer work for the good of the American people. Instead they've all sold out to Goldman-Sachs and the Military-Industrial-Pharmaceutical complex.
1. Demand that our representatives hold true to their sworn oath of office, and uphold the Constitution.
2. Educate yourself on each candidate before voting for the most popular or best looking.
3. Get out and vote.
4. Hold all politicians accountable and get involved in public meetings.
5. Go to the web site www.newswithviews.comand sign-up for the free e-mail alerts.
This November’s election will go down in history as the most important our country has ever held and the hour is getting late. We only have a limited time to act, but I believe so much in this country and its people, that I know we can do it.
© 2012 Paul Walter – All Rights Reserved
Paul Walter escaped the slavery of communism at the age of 14 with his family in 1956 and immigrated to United States (legally) in 1959. He served 3 years in the U.S. Armed Forces, was honorably discharged and became a U.S. citizen in 1965. Owner of Walter Publishing & Research, Inc., he republished a 100 year old book titled:The Coming Battle, the true history of our national debt. The book is currently in its 5th printing.
Keep this circulating until SOMETHING is DONE
I challenge you to read this and NOT have the will to pass it on to your 20+ No one has been able to explain to me why young men and women serve in the U.S. Military for 20 years, risking their lives protecting freedom, and only get 50% of their pay. While Politicians hold their political positions in the safe confines of the capital, protected by these same men and women, and receive full pay retirement after serving one term. It just does
not make any sense.
Monday on Fox news they learned that the staffers of Congress family members are exempt from having to pay back student loans. This will get national attention if other news networks will broadcast it. When you add this to the below, just where will all of it stop?
35 States file lawsuit against the Federal Government
Governors of 35 states have filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38 (of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention.
This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on.
This is an idea that we should address.
For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress.
Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform… in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever.. The self-serving must stop.
If each person that receives this will forward it on to 20 people, in three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message.. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution: "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States ." >
You are one of my 20+
"If you choose not to decide ~ you still have made a choice"
February 28th, 2012 by olddog
As long as the private banksters create money from nothing, i.e. legalized counterfeiting, and hide behind the shield of corporation personhood, LLC liability exemption and government guaranteed loans, expropriating from THE PEOPLE and again passing their liabilities on the taxpayers, the ordinary family will continue to be reduced to perpetual and permanent poverty.
Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most conspicuous and sacred responsibility, all talk of sovereignty of Parliament and of democracy is idle and futile… Once a nation parts with control of its credit, it matters not who makes the nation’s laws… Usury once in control will wreck any nation.
William Lyon Mackenzie King
Federal Reserve is a Cache of Stolen Assets
The American Revolution, in no small part, was a repudiation of the central banking tyranny exported to the New World by the Bank of England. Few legacies have grown more despotic than the consequences of living under the rule of fractional reserve banking. Many good willed conservatives understand that the system is imploding. Some envision a second American Revolution that expels the remnant Tories that have hijacked our Federalism separation of powers form of government. Woefully, the prospects for a States Rights revolt are slim. However, the scenario of a domestic French Revolution style carnage is brewing with every escalation of the pompous arrogance worthy of a Jean-Joseph, marquis de Laborde or the manipulative usury of the House of Rothschild.
The eruption of populist outrage is long overdue. The lack of objective mainstream media coverage is expected. Their attempt to spin the natural disguise for a corrupt establishment in the hearts of sincere and persecuted citizens is typical. The elite’s message is that they will either control the movement, or at the very least, strip it from any positive synergism. Send in the clowns, like Michael Moore. Wall Street Capitalism: A Love Affair explains the hideous agenda of the clueless socialists that condemn all things Wall Street, while advancing the ultimate goals of the New World Order globalists.
Street theater no longer is enough. The peasants are rallying their pitchforks, as they storm the Bastille; however, they got their GPS coordinates wrong. The correct address is 33 Liberty Street, New York, NY. That is the location of the dominate Federal Reserve temple. When the public finally comes to grips with the real cause of the unsustainable debt, they will understand that the private central banking system bears the ultimate redress for their sins against America and all humanity.
A Privatised Money Supply, presents an informative analysis.
Assuming a reserve ratio of 1:10 [i.e. all commercial banks must have the reserve ratio on deposit at the private central bank, the mother of all banks] the table below shows how $100 of private central bank created money (GCM), i.e. cash, is used by the rest of the private banking system to create $900 of interest-bearing bank-created money (BCM) in the form of loans. The reserve ratio is the ratio of cash reserves (GCM) to deposits (mostly BCM). In our example the banking system consists of 50 banks, but the money creation process would be essentially the same for any number of banks from one to infinity.
Modern accounting uses double entry book keeping where liabilities and assets are kept exactly equal. A bank’s liabilities are its deposits. Its assets are its loans (including government bonds which are loans to government of money created from nothing by both the private central banksters and the private commercial banksters) and its cash reserves. Here is how the banking system creates money. In column 1 $100 of cash is deposited in Bank 1. Bank 1 creates a $90 loan in the form of a deposit as shown in column 2. This deposit is pure BCM and, because it must be paid back with interest, is an asset. With a reserve ratio of 1:10 the bank puts aside $10 in cash (column 3) to meet cash demands from the person who deposited the $100. The remaining $90 in cash covers the $90 loan. The borrower proceeds to write cheques on his $90 deposit and these cheques get deposited in Bank 2. For these cheques Bank 2 demands and gets cash from Bank 1 until eventually all $90 ends up in Bank 2. (Naturally in real life more than two banks are involved. Thus the transactions are not so simple and orderly as they must be here for explanatory purposes, but everything comes out in the wash to give exactly the same result.) However the original $100 deposit still stands to the credit of the depositor (a liability for Bank 1) even though $90 of it has moved on to Bank 2. And the $90 loan Bank 1 created when it first received the original $100 deposit also stands (an asset for Bank 1). Banks 2, 3, 4, etc. then repeat this process eventually creating $900 of BCM in the form of loans (as shown in column 2) and dispersing the original $100 as cash reserves throughout the banking system (as shown in column 3).
Note that $900 of the $1000 of deposits in column 1 is BCM, i.e. credit created by the banks in the form of loans. (Banks make loans by "depositing money" in your account which you must pay back with interest. Thus they are loan/deposits.) Only the original $100 cash deposit is GCM. One other point. As a loan/deposit gets spent, a deposit in some other bank grows in inverse proportion. Thus the banks have increased the money supply by $900 and not by $1800. That would be double counting. The important points, however, are as follows: this ingenious system is called fractional reserve banking; it creates debt for the sole purpose of enriching the banking class; it is a subtle form of theft; historically it was condemned as a form of usury.
Deposits (90% BCM)
Loan/Deposits (100% BCM)
Cash Reserves (100% GCM)
This method of theft operates as the normal course of business. What the banksters do with the money they obtain from debt created money is even more repulsive. All the financial speculative instruments of leveraged trading just compound the heist. So what do these outlaws do with all the money?
The end net result is that they buy, especially at rock bottom prices, all the real assets that the filthy money can purchase. When you think of Wall Street greed, go beyond the usual suspects and focus on the controllers of the assets that are under the hegemony of the central bank. Here lies the reason why the rebellion must remove the engine of enslavement from the landscape for any future financial system of commerce.
Think about who really owns the land, the buildings and the resources in our country. In order to really understand the scope and extent of the economy, the differential between actual Main Street enterprise, that feeds, clothes and shelters the population, is minuscule when compared to the financial assets, both liquid and real property, that is under the command and control of the central bank.
Most individuals do not own property encumbrance free. Most debt is owed to the banksters. The middle class is in a tailspin because the Fed has a zero interest rate policy that effectively diminished your return on capital of your savings to nothing. The same is not true for the banks. The fact that they have in excess of a 2 Trillion Dollars cash hoard on their balance sheets and refuse to lend out money to the general public, demonstrates that the inside money is waiting to pick up even more real assets, when the signal comes for the total collapse.
TARP, QE2 and the Twist are all ploys to enrich the selective banks that are part of the orthodox Fed fraternity. Technically all federal charted banks have an ownership interest in the Fed. Who among us are so naive to think that every bank is equal to the sacredly held corporate interlocking directorates that make and direct monetary policy?
Only when the middle class takes to the streets with a spontaneous civil disobedience commitment that dwarfs the Tea Party movement, will the central banking tyranny be eliminated. All the fraudulent debt that funded the asset acquisitions of crooks must be clawed back. As long as the banksters hide behind the shield of corporation personhood, LLC liability exemption and government guaranteed loans, the ordinary family will continue to be reduced to perpetual and permanent poverty.
What kind of revolution is coming to America? The lesson of the French élan of bloodletting to remove an aristocratic class is not pretty. However, a national discussion needs to concentrate on:
1) Methods of eliminating the Federal Reserve fraud and restoring an honest money system for commerce
2) Repudiation of the corporatist "Free Trade" global business model and a return to a merchant class free enterprise independent domestic economy
3) Confiscation of assets and wealth acquired through illegal systematic RICO style schemes that demand treble damages from their ill-gotten gain
Americans deserve property right protections from the criminal extortion and the cold-blooded offenses that the banksters used, to steal the national wealth. The expanding protest must result in a true restoration of a traditional upwardly mobile society, not an expanded nanny state. The suffocating debt and the profane system that spawned it must end. The term "Citizen" does not apply to elitist plutocrats. If Americans want to stave off a 21st century version, of the Committee of Public Safety, get behind the "Revolt against the Fed". Tear down the House of Rothschild. This is one time the concept of "Reparations" has standing in a legitimate court of law.
Just between you, me, and the outhouse, when you consider that there are very few honest judges left in America, and in particular I am referring to the Georgia judge who refused to indict Obama for contempt of court. Also, the fact that the Bankers now own our National and most State Governments, and our Military, I see very little possibility of anything less than an outright rebellion making any progress in stopping the Bankers. Now couple this with the fact that at least half of our citizens actually support fractional reserve banking. So, along with being at war with the governments of the United States, we would also be in a civil war. Conclusion: We who demand honest currency for a better life, will have to be willing to die to obtain it for our posterity. Our young brain washed soldiers have no problem with a willingness to die in intentionally provoked wars, what would it take for we who are aware to be willing to die?
February 27th, 2012 by olddog
This article is a guest post from a WesternJournalism.com reader. If you are interested in writing for Western Journalism, click here.
But well informed!
I am writing this with a profound sense of urgency. I am an American who has expanded my education through hard work. Nothing has ever been given to me on a silver platter.
I am just an average citizen with something to say. I read a lot about American politics and our corrupt government (on both sides of the isle), American history, our economy and world events.
One truth stands out – America is in deep kimchi. To bury one’s head in the sand or look the other way while our nation is on fire and do nothing is unconscionable. If we intend to stand by and be an observer and not a participator in our constitutional process we will have no one to blame but ourselves.
There have been many warning signs of what has taken place over the last few years and it’s not a pretty picture. Many people tend to ignore what is going on in our government.
Take a look back. In the 1930’s and through the second World War people ignored what was taking place around them, (its called complacency) and they allowed one of the most tyrannical governments on earth, lead by a great orator, to take over their country. We all know the end result but in saying that I’m quite sure there are a lot of young people today that do not have a clue what I am talking about.
There are a lot of truths about American History that are no longer taught in our nation’s Public Schools and Universities. This is a crying shame.
As the old saying goes “freedom is not free”and knowing this, there is a simple truth, “seek and you shall find”. With the advent of the internet, information is much easier to find. It’s all there so be informed and make competent decisions not based on the color of a person’s skin.
In 1776, fifty-six men, who were the leaders of the thirteen American colonies, signed their names below the last sentence of the Declaration of Independence, which reads-
“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor”.
I, for one, would be most surprised to find this same quality of Politicians in our elected Government today. A trusted body of representatives that would make the same kind of pledge.
From their courageous decisions, the greatest nation in the history of the World was born.
The vision of the Founders is the bedrock of our nation and the hope of all peoples of all nations who yearn to live in freedom – in our Declaration of Independence, they penned these famous worlds:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.
At the time of its signing, there were about three million people in the thirteen American colonies. Today, according to Wikipedia, there are 25 full democracies and 53 flawed democracies around the World.
Throughout our nation’s capitol the spirit and words of our Christian heritage from our Founders are displayed in public to remind all peoples of America’s promises.
The scriptures proclaiming liberty are inscribed on our Liberty Bell; there are the Ten Commandments inscribed on the walls of the Supreme Court; More Scriptures carved into the tribute blocks at the Washington Monument. Engraved in metal at the top of the Washington Monument are the words “Praise be to God” and there is “In God We Trust” engraved on several Government buildings and on our currency. Many people do not realize that our Congress still opens every session with prayer just as the Founding Fathers wanted.
Despite all this, evil men and women have taken State sponsored prayer and The Ten Commandments out of our public schools and it seems that every time God is mentioned in schools, there is a challenge by the ACLU.
Could it be that these rights are being taken away because the Commandments of God are no longer written “in the hearts” of many of the American People?
There are many “Quotes from our Founding Fathers and others” that should remind us of our Christian heritage. Quotes from past Presidents and modern day Statesman, like former Ambassador Alan Keyes, and many others are not hard to find with the advent of the internet.
These are quotes that you will not hear or learn about in today’s modern history textbooks in our public schools.
I believe the reason many Americans are not “raising Cain” over Obama’s unconstitutional programs and far – left agendas, is mainly due to the fact that most modern day Americans know little about their own country or Government. They are being brainwashed and lead around by their noses by Government Entitlements and the Main Stream Media propping up and capitulating with our current “Far Left Administration”.
This politically correct crap in our country has got to go and the sooner the better.
For the last 50 years or so our public school students (today’s adults and Leaders) have not been taught anything but a bunch of secular and socialist lies in the textbooks they studied from.
Our entire American history has been rewritten and anything true and /or pro-American has been deleted. They (the future leaders) are taught, little, if anything about our Constitution or our “Republican form of Government”. Instead they are being taught that we are a democracy in which when studied, our Founding Fathers despised.
What would our Founding Fathers think of America today? They must be rolling over in their graves to see where our politicians have taken our nation to date.
Our Founders had an opportunity to establish a democracy in America and wisely chose not to. In fact, the Founders made quite clear that we are not, and were never, to become a democracy.
A few quotes to think about:
1. Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
-James Madison, Federalist Papers
2. Remember, democracy never last long. It’s soon wastes, exhausts, and murders it. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.
3. A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way.
4. The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness [excessive license] which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty.
Fisher Ames – Works of Fisher Ames Boston: T.B.Wait & Co., 1809), p24, Speech on biennial Elections, delivered January, 1788.
5. We have seen the tumult of democracy terminate… as [it has] everywhere terminated, in despotism…democracy! savage and wild. Thou who wouldst bring down the virtuous and wise to thy level of folly and guilt.
-Fisher Ames – Author of the house language for the First Amendment
6. the experience of all former ages had shown that of a human government, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived.
Governor Morris – Signer and Penman of the Constitution
7. A simple democracy is one of the greatest of evils.
-John Quincy Adams
8. In democracy … there are commonly tumults and disorders … Therefore a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical Government on earth.
Benjamin Rush – Signer of the declaration
9. Pure democracy cannot subsist nor be carried far into the departments of state; it is very subject to caprice and the madness for popular rage.
10. It may generally be remarked that the more a government resembles a pure democracy the more they abound with disorder and confusion.
John Witherspoon – Signer of the Declaration
11. Many Americans seem to be unable to define the difference between the two, but there is a difference. That difference rests in the source of authority.
Zephaniah Swift – Author of America’s First Legal Text, speaking about democracies and republics
Our founders understood that a “pure” democracy which they are pushing for in America today, always (a) self destructs as America is doing, or (b) turn into a government of socialist tyranny as Obama and his henchmen are pushing for.
Our public school students are also being taught that our nation was founded on “secular humanist (atheistic)” beliefs. This in itself is the biggest lie being shoved down our children’s throats.
Not all, but the majority of our Founders were devout Christians. 22 of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence had graduated from a Christian seminary and 9 were ordained Christian ministers or elders.
Now keep in mind that until the 1920’s, the bible and its teaching was the primary textbook in our public schools. I guess the very men who gave us our Christian based government did not understand “separation of church and state”. Even though there were a huge debate concerning the decision to sever our ties with England, amazingly the preamble itself was never debated.
This preamble giving God the glory as Creator and our insatiable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (private property) was written by Thomas Jefferson of whom today’s textbooks portrays as a Deist.
Will we be able to recognize how miserably short we have fallen from the ideals of our Founders and the Christian principles that we once held so dear? Will the need of realization drive us to our knees in the hope that God will spare our nation?
I say in order to bring America back to our once great and free nation we once had, we must first take our educational system back from the very people and government organizations who are doing everything in their power to bring us down, bringing us into their Socialist dream of a global government and to destroy our Founders declaration of success for America.
I will save for another writing the unconstitutional deliberate dismantling and destruction of our First and Second Amendment rights by our current Administration with some capitulation from Congress for another time.
My final summation is “We The People”. It’s up to us, not the government, to turn things around. Its time we take a stand and this time we make a difference come November 2012 and Vote to save our Constitutional Republic from the abyss.